Malaysia Case Law: Decisions & Judgments

Topic

Publication

Legal area

Court

23 Feb 2026

SUNDRA RAJOO A/L NADARAJAH Leaderonomics Sdn Bhd

Citation

W-02(W)-1130-07/2023 (Mahkamah Rayuan)
Court

W
Case number

W-02(W)-1130-07/2023 (Mahkamah Rayuan)

The appeal is dismissed because the appellant failed to prove the particular device from which the publication originated and that the respondent had custody or control of that device at the material time; consequently the presumption under s.114A(3) Evidence Act 1950 could not be invoked and respondent could not be held liable for the publication based on the evidence adduced (metadata and circumstantial inferences were insufficient).
14 Oct 2025

DING MING MING 1. ) LIM SU JIN 2. ) LIM SU LING

Citation

JA-23NCvC-4-04/2021 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Court

High Court
Case number

JA-23NCvC-4-04/2021 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

The court held that the impugned Facebook posts and WhatsApp messages were defamatory and published to third parties, that identification of the Plaintiff within the relevant circle was established, and that the Defendants failed to prove justification, fair comment or qualified privilege; the Defendants' own pleading admitting deliberate publication to damage the Plaintiff established malice and negated their defences, warranting a global award of RM350,000 plus injunctive and remedial orders.
14 Oct 2025

SHARUL RIDZUAN BIN AB.SALAM 1. ) ROKIAH BINTI DENAN 2. ) MUSTAFA BIN DENAN 3. ) IBRAHIM BIN DENAN

Citation

BH-B53F-2-10/2023 (Mahkamah Sesyen)
Court

Sessions Court
Case number

BH-B53F-2-10/2023 (Mahkamah Sesyen)

Plaintiff failed to discharge the threshold burden to prove the existence and publication of the alleged defamatory utterances by Defendants 2 and 3 because of absence of direct witnesses and contradicting testimony leading to adverse inference; for Defendant 1 the phrase was proved but was factually true and, in context of burial and as understood by a reasonable person, was not defamatory; therefore the defamation claim failed and must be dismissed.
29 Sept 2025

1. ) HO THAM MOI 2. ) LEE HONG KEOW TAY YU YAA

Citation

BA-12BCY-1-01/2025 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Court

High Court
Case number

BA-12BCY-1-01/2025 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

Identification was not proved objectively and the words, read individually and cumulatively in context, were rhetorical expressions of domestic grievance rather than statements of verifiable fact that would lower the Plaintiffs in the estimation of right‑thinking members of society; therefore the Sessions Court rightly dismissed the defamation claim and the High Court must not interfere.
22 Sept 2025

KOMPLEKS PERKAYUAN KELANTAN SDN BHD HUSAM BIN MUSA

Citation

DA-23CY-06-09/2017 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Court

High Court
Case number

DA-23CY-06-09/2017 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

Court found on balance of probabilities that defendant published the three impugned statements, that the shorthand 'KPK' referred to plaintiff, that the statements were false and defamatory, and that defendant failed to prove justification or fair comment and acted with malice; accordingly plaintiff succeeded and was awarded general damages, injunctions, deletion/withdrawal and costs.
18 Sept 2025

THIEN HONG MACHINERY (M) SDN BHD 1. ) MS TIME SDN BHD 2. ) DATUK SERI MOHD EFFANDIE BIN AHMAD

Citation

BA-12B-9-01/2024 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Court

High Court
Case number

BA-12B-9-01/2024 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

Defendants failed to discharge the burden to prove justification as at the date of publication; evidence showed Plaintiff 1 had settled amounts before publication and Plaintiff 2 never guaranteed the debt, Defendant 3 acted as publisher under Defendant 1's authority so both are jointly liable for defamation and malicious falsehood, malice and damage were established, and given seriousness and persistence the appellate court increased damages to RM150,000 and varied the injunction to permanent.
24 Aug 2025

DATO' SERI MUHAMMAD SANUSI BIN MD NOR DATUK SERI SAIFUDDIN NASUTION BIN ISMAIL

Citation

KA-23CY-1-08/2023 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Court

High Court
Case number

KA-23CY-1-08/2023 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

The court found both impugned speeches referred to the plaintiff, were published, and bore defamatory imputations (REE accused plaintiff of theft; MARRIS accused him of serious financial misgovernance). The Defendant failed to prove truth/justification and fair comment, and malice was inferred from selective half-truths, timing during an election campaign and reckless reliance on withdrawn or incomplete documents; qualified privilege did not apply. Republication liability attached. Remedy: defendant liable for defamation and ordered to pay damages, costs and to make specified apologies and un…
12 Aug 2025

1. ) DATO' K. KUMARAENDRAN 2. ) DEVKUMAR A/L K. KUMARAENDRAN 1. ) ALBERT A/L ANTONI TASS 2. ) Selvaraja Namchivayam

Citation

PA-22NCvC-180-11/2021 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Court

High Court
Case number

PA-22NCvC-180-11/2021 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

The impugned words in the 23.8.2021 letter bore defamatory meanings referring to the Plaintiffs, were published when personnel of the Plaintiffs' firm read the letter, and the Second Defendant is liable for those words as principal for his solicitor; pleaded defences failed for lack of pleaded particulars and evidence, no offer of amends under s7 was made and malice was established; judgment for Plaintiffs with global damages and costs awarded.
30 Jul 2025

MAH YOKE KEONG 1. ) PERBADANAN PENGURUSAN GENTING PERMAI PARK & RESORT 2. ) CHONG AH KOW @ CHONG CHING CHEE 3. ) NG YOON KIN

Citation

CB-23NCvC-2-08/2022 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Court

High Court
Case number

CB-23NCvC-2-08/2022 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

Minutes displayed by the management corporation that impute wrongdoing to the plaintiff were defamatory when read by a reasonable reader; statutory obligation to prepare and display minutes does not confer absolute privilege or justification for defamatory content — the committee remains responsible for content and must ensure no defamatory statements are published; defendants failed to establish a valid defence of privilege or fair comment and plaintiff discharged the burden to establish defamation; accordingly judgment entered for plaintiff with specified remedies.
14 Jul 2025

1. ) Tuan Muhammad Shahrul Azlan Bin Tuan Abdul Rahman 2. ) Siti Nur Amira Binti Ibrahim 1. ) Dr. Sarah Sakinah Binti Abd Rahman 2. ) Tuan Pengarah, Hospital Besut 3. ) Tuan Pengarah, Hospital Sultanah Nur Zahirah 4. ) Pengarah Hospital Raj

Citation

TA-B51CY-1-01/2021 (Mahkamah Sesyen)
Court

Sessions Court
Case number

TA-B51CY-1-01/2021 (Mahkamah Sesyen)

On the balance of probabilities the plaintiffs failed to prove the conjunctive elements of defamation, failed to prove malice and failed to prove compensable loss; the defendant established justification and fair comment based on facts and witness evidence; therefore the plaintiffs' claim is dismissed and costs awarded to the defendant.