LOOI WEI SHEN DR.ONG KEH ONG

LOOI WEI SHEN DR.ONG KEH ONG

The High Court affirmed the Sessions Court finding that the defendants published libellous statements referring to the plaintiff, malice was established defeating qualified privilege/fair comment, and the Sessions Court's award of RM50,000 general damages and RM10,000 costs against each defendant was a proper exercise of judicial discretion and would not be disturbed on appeal.

Citation
AB-12BNCvC-25-12/2019 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Parties
Appellant/plaintiff: DR ONG KEH ONG; First Respondent/first Defendant: LOKE HON MUN; Second Respondent/second Defendant: HONG KAM SANG; Third Respondent/third Defendant: LOOI WEI SHEN
Court
High Court
Jurisdiction
Malaysia
Judgment Date
12 April 2022
Case Number
AB-12BNCvC-25-12/2019 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Procedural Posture
Defamation Civil Appeal / Appeal Hearing and Judgment at High Court
Outcome
Plaintiff's appeal on quantum dismissed; cross-appeals by first and second defendants on quantum dismissed; third defendant's appeal on liability and quantum dismissed; Sessions Court judgment and injunction affirmed.
Legal Topics
Quantum of Damages, Qualified Privilege, Fair Comment, Malice, Publication
Source Language
Malay/English
Defamation Tort Media Law Civil Procedure Quantum of Damages Qualified Privilege Fair Comment Malice +1 more

Case Brief

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 10 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 5
Sign in to unlock

Parties

DR ONG KEH ONG

Appellant/plaintiff

LOKE HON MUN

First Respondent/first Defendant

HONG KAM SANG

Second Respondent/second Defendant

LOOI WEI SHEN

Third Respondent/third Defendant

Procedural Posture

Defamation Civil Appeal / Appeal Hearing and Judgment at High Court

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the impugned publications amounted to libel and referred to the plaintiff
  2. 2 Whether defences of qualified privilege or fair comment applied and whether malice was established
  3. 3 Whether the quantum of damages awarded by the Sessions Court was adequate and whether apportionment between defendants was required

Ratio Decidendi

The High Court affirmed the Sessions Court finding that the defendants published libellous statements referring to the plaintiff, malice was established defeating qualified privilege/fair comment, and the Sessions Court's award of RM50,000 general damages and RM10,000 costs against each defendant was a proper exercise of judicial discretion and would not be disturbed on appeal.

Court Disposition

Plaintiff's appeal on quantum dismissed; cross-appeals by first and second defendants on quantum dismissed; third defendant's appeal on liability and quantum dismissed; Sessions Court judgment and injunction affirmed.

Orders

  • Defendants are injuncted from repeating or publishing the defamatory comments about the plaintiff
  • Each defendant to pay RM50,000 to the plaintiff as general damages (total RM150,000)