2011 MarsdenLR 4769 ; 2011 MarsdenLR 1

RAVINTHRAN PARAMAGURU
CHONG SIEW CHIANG – Appellant
Versus
NG KIM HO & ANOR – Respondent

The defamatory nature of statements was established by their tendency to lower the plaintiff's reputation, identifying him as the target of the defendant's remarks, which were ruled not justified.

Headnote:(A) Defamation Law - Slander and Libel - Plaintiffs' claim against political adversary and newspaper publisher for defamatory statements made during a political rally and published in a newspaper. (Paras 1-3, 4-8)

(B) Defamatory Meaning - The court applied various established tests for determining if the statements were defamatory, concluding that the terms 'ungrateful', 'hypocrite', and 'perfidy' tend to lower the plaintiff in the estimation of right-thinking members of society. (Paras 11-19)

(C) Identification - The court found that the language used clearly identified the plaintiff specifically despite the 1st defendant's argument of generality. The test applied was whether the reasonable person would identify the plaintiff as the individual referred to. (Paras 24-30)

(D) Defence of Justification - The court ruled that the 1st defendant did not validly justify the defamatory statements, as the evidence did not support claims of truth for the words used. (Paras 39-41) (E) Result - The court ruled in favor of the plaintiff, affirming that the defendants' statements were defamatory and awarding damages. (Paras 36-38)