BRYAN LUI SHIEN VIENG SEW SOON SENG

BRYAN LUI SHIEN VIENG SEW SOON SENG

The court found the impugned statements prima facie unarguably defamatory, the defendant failed to prove truth or any defence (justification, fair comment, absolute privilege), the absolute privilege defence was inapplicable because the relevant documents were not read in open court, and the Gatley criteria were...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
WA-23NCvC-61-08/2022 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Parties
Appellant/defendant: SEW SOON SENG; Respondent/plaintiff: BRYAN LUI SHIEN VIENG
Court
High Court
Jurisdiction
Malaysia
Judgment Date
8 December 2022
Case Number
WA-23NCvC-61-08/2022 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Procedural Posture
Civil Defamation / Application for Interim Injunction / Appeal Against Part of High Court Order Granting Interim Prohibitory Injunction
Outcome
Appeal dismissed; interim prohibitory injunction affirmed and granted in favour of the respondent/plaintiff
Legal Topics
Publication of Alleged Defamatory Statements, Defences: Justification (truth), Fair Comment, Absolute Privilege, Requirements for Interim Injunction in Defamation (gatley Factors), Privilege for Court Documents Vs Documents Not Read in Open Court, Motive/mala Fide in Publications
Defamation Interim Injunction Civil Procedure Legal Professional Privilege Data Protection Publication of Alleged Defamatory Statements Defences: Justification (truth), Fair Comment, Absolute Privilege Requirements for Interim Injunction in Defamation (gatley Factors) +2 more

Source-derived case record

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 4 Authorities cited 12 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

SEW SOON SENG

Appellant/defendant

BRYAN LUI SHIEN VIENG

Respondent/plaintiff

Procedural Posture

Civil Defamation / Application for Interim Injunction / Appeal Against Part of High Court Order Granting Interim Prohibitory Injunction

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether an interim prohibitory injunction should be granted to restrain publication of the impugned statements
  2. 2 Whether the defendant established defences of justification, fair comment and absolute privilege
  3. 3 Whether the impugned statements formed part of court proceedings/documents that attract absolute privilege

Ratio Decidendi

The court found the impugned statements prima facie unarguably defamatory, the defendant failed to prove truth or any defence (justification, fair comment, absolute privilege), the absolute privilege defence was inapplicable because the relevant documents were not read in open court, and the Gatley criteria were satisfied; accordingly an interim prohibitory injunction was warranted and granted with costs in the cause.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed; interim prohibitory injunction affirmed and granted in favour of the respondent/plaintiff

Orders

  • Defendant is restrained from publishing, disseminating or repeating the four specified impugned statements set out in Annex 4 until final determination of the proceedings
  • Costs in the cause