Malaysia Case Law: Decisions & Judgments

Topic

Innuendo

Legal area

Court

21 Aug 2025

NURUL AMIRAH BINTI OMAR CHE KHASMAWANI BINTI CHE MOHD NOOR

Citation

TA-A53F-2-08/2022 (Mahkamah Sesyen)
Court

Sessions Court
Case number

TA-A53F-2-08/2022 (Mahkamah Sesyen)

The Court found the Plaintiff proved the three essential elements of defamation (defamatory meaning, identification, and publication to third parties). The Defendant elected not to call witnesses after a 'no case to answer' submission; by established authority the Plaintiff's uncontroverted evidence is to be treated as true and the burden shifted to the Defendant to prove truth/justification. The Defendant failed to rebut the presumption of falsity; accordingly the impugned publications were defamatory and the Plaintiff was entitled to damages, interest and costs as assessed by the Court.
8 May 2025

NUR SYUHADA BINTI ISMAIL ZAITON BINTI ABDULLAH

Citation

KA-23NCvC-4-07/2020 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Court

High Court
Case number

KA-23NCvC-4-07/2020 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

On the balance of probabilities the court found D1 and D2 published the impugned Facebook/Whatsapp statements which referred to the plaintiff and were defamatory in their natural and ordinary meaning; defendants failed to establish justification or fair comment in respect of those publications; plaintiff proved loss of business and reputational damage warranting awards of general and aggravated damages; defendants' counterclaims failed because the plaintiff established justification and fair comment for her WhatsApp/Facebook statements. Accordingly plaintiff’s claims succeeded to the extent o…
21 Jan 2025

ROHANA BINTI IBRAHIM KHADIJAH BINTI ISKANDAR PIHAK TERKILAN Mohamad Yusri bin Abdullah

Citation

BA-23NCvC-67-12/2021 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Court

High Court
Case number

BA-23NCvC-67-12/2021 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

The court held the offending statements were capable of bearing defamatory imputations as to the plaintiff's professional capability and moral character, identification was established, the defendant was liable for publication because the meeting was recorded and saved on a public office channel making publication the natural and probable consequence, but the defendant was not liable for the subsequent WhatsApp republication which broke the chain of causation; damages of RM30,000 and costs RM25,000 with interest were awarded.
4 Dec 2023

SATEES A/L MUNIANDY SETHUBATHI A/L MANIAM

Citation

PA-12B-19-07/2023 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Court

High Court
Case number

PA-12B-19-07/2023 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

On the balance of probabilities the appellant failed to prove the crucial identification element: the impugned posts when read in context referred ambiguously to family/company/other persons and not to the appellant personally; publication and defamatory meaning were considered but identification deficiency defeated the claim; Sessions Court findings were not shown to be perverse and were affirmed, so the appeal is dismissed.
12 Jun 2022

MOHAMAD MUNEER BIN MOHD NOR 1. ) FAZLI BIN BAHAROM 2. ) SHAHRUL EZAD BIN MOHAMEDDIN 3. ) RADIUS ONE SDN BHD 4. ) MEASAT BROADCAST NETWORK SYSTEM BHD

Citation

DA-23CY-4-09/2021 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Court

High Court
Case number

DA-23CY-4-09/2021 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

The court struck out the statement of claim and related writ because the plaintiff failed to plead the specific words or the extrinsic particulars necessary to sustain an innuendo-based defamation claim and the fictional depiction (different vehicle model, character profile and setting) meant a reasonable person would not identify the plaintiff; consequently the claim was scandalous, frivolous or vexatious and an abuse of the court's process.
25 Aug 2020

WAWASAN RAJAWALI SDN BHD TOH SHUA HUA & 121 LAGI

Citation

WA-23CY-59-10/2019 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Court

High Court
Case number

WA-23CY-59-10/2019 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

The statement of claim failed to plead facts from which the postings could reasonably be understood to refer to the plaintiff; the postings did not identify the plaintiff or its project and the pleadings did not identify which defendants were the publishers or account administrators; therefore the claim did not disclose a reasonable cause of action and must be struck out under Order 18 r.19(1)(a).
31 Jul 2019

AHMAD SUHAIMI BIN ABDULLAH AMIR SHARIFFUDDIN BIN ABD RAUB

Citation

JA-22NCVC-147-07/2016 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Court

High Court
Case number

JA-22NCVC-147-07/2016 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

Plaintiff failed on the balance of probabilities to prove the published Facebook statements were defamatory of or referred to him; alternatively, even if they referred to him the defendant established justification based on related findings of fraud and asset-freezing in connected proceedings, therefore the claim is dismissed and costs awarded to the defendant.
1 Jan 1900

HARYANY BINTI MOHAMAD 1. ) 1.RADZIAH BINTI OTHUMAN SAHIB (NO. K/P: 930203-07-5362) 2. ) 2.MUHAMAD HAFIZ BIN ZAINULA (NO. K/P: 900916-07-5779) 3. ) 3.AMBIGA DEVY CHIN 4. ) 4.MKINI DOTCOM SDN. BHD. (NO. SYARIKAT: 489718-U) 5. ) 5.TERESA SUSAN

Citation

PA-23NCvC-9-07/2020 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Court

High Court
Case number

PA-23NCvC-9-07/2020 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

The court struck out the statement of claim against the applicant defendants because the plaintiff failed to particularise the alleged defamatory words and the Letter and Comments did not, in their ordinary meaning, convey the pleaded defamatory meanings; innuendo was not pleaded as required; consequently no reasonable cause of action was disclosed.