TING SIU HUA DATO’ TING CHING LEE

TING SIU HUA DATO’ TING CHING LEE

The Court dismissed the plaintiffs' defamation appeal because plaintiffs failed to prove on the balance of probabilities that the defendant originated or published the impugned advertisement or was responsible for its republication on social media; conversely, the Court allowed the defendant's counterclaim, finding on the evidence (including DW1's testimony) that an oral agreement to provide two lines of credit and a rolling rebate existed and, following Wynn Resorts, such credit facilities are loans/credit not unenforceable wagering agreements under Civil Law Act s26 and Contracts Act s31, thus entitling the defendant to recovery.

Citation
Q-02(NCvC)(W)-1393-07/2019 (Mahkamah Rayuan)
Parties
Appellant/respondent: Ting Siu Hua; Appellant/respondent: Dato' Ting Ching Lee; Appellant: Ting Heng Nguong; Appellant: Ngu Toh Yi
Court
NCvC
Jurisdiction
Malaysia
Judgment Date
20 March 2024
Case Number
Q-02(NCvC)(W)-1393-07/2019 (Mahkamah Rayuan)
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Court of Appeal Judgment (final Disposition on Appeal)
Outcome
Plaintiffs' appeal dismissed; Defendant's appeal allowed in respect of counterclaim; High Court decision set aside as to counterclaim and counterclaim allowed.
Legal Topics
Libel, Publication and Republication on Social Media, Gaming Credit Facilities, Illegality and Nullity of Contracts, Circumstantial Evidence, Admissions
Source Language
Malay/English
Defamation Contract Law Gambling Law Evidence Libel Publication and Republication on Social Media Gaming Credit Facilities Illegality and Nullity of Contracts +2 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 9 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Ting Siu Hua

Appellant/respondent

Dato' Ting Ching Lee

Appellant/respondent

Ting Heng Nguong

Appellant

Ngu Toh Yi

Appellant

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Court of Appeal Judgment (final Disposition on Appeal)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the defendant published the alleged defamatory advertisement and republished it on Facebook/WeChat
  2. 2 Whether plaintiffs proved publication to third parties and identification
  3. 3 Whether an oral agreement existed for two lines of credit (USD1,000,000 and USD500,000) and rolling rebate (USD193,800)

Ratio Decidendi

The Court dismissed the plaintiffs' defamation appeal because plaintiffs failed to prove on the balance of probabilities that the defendant originated or published the impugned advertisement or was responsible for its republication on social media; conversely, the Court allowed the defendant's counterclaim, finding on the evidence (including DW1's testimony) that an oral agreement to provide two lines of credit and a rolling rebate existed and, following Wynn Resorts, such credit facilities are loans/credit not unenforceable wagering agreements under Civil Law Act s26 and Contracts Act s31, thus entitling the defendant to recovery.

Court Disposition

Plaintiffs' appeal dismissed; Defendant's appeal allowed in respect of counterclaim; High Court decision set aside as to counterclaim and counterclaim allowed.

Orders

  • Plaintiffs' appeal dismissed with costs to respondent
  • Defendant's appeal allowed; High Court judgment set aside insofar as defendant's counterclaim and counterclaim allowed in terms of paragraph 26 of defendant's counterclaim with costs