Back
2017 MarsdenLR 2521
HIGH COURT MALAYA PENANG
LIM GUAN ENG – Appellant
Versus
NEW STRAITS TIMES PRESS (M) BHD – Respondent
[Civil Suit No: PA-23NCVC-2-03-2016]
A publication can be deemed defamatory if it bears a false implication harming a person's reputation, requiring careful verification and responsible journalism.
Headnote:Statute Analysis: This judgment analyze the claims under s 53 of the Specific Relief Act 1950 and inherent jurisdiction. Facts of the Case: The plaintiff, a public official, claimed defamation by a newspaper after a consent judgment was reached against another defendant.
Findings of Court:
The plaintiff proved that the impugned statements were defamatory, not a fair report, and damaging to his reputation.
Issues: Whether the statements were defamatory and if the defendant could plead qualified privilege.
Ratio Decidendi: The court asserted the burden on the plaintiff and examined reasonable persons' interpretations of statements.
Result: The defendant is liable for defamation and must pay RM300,000 in damages along with RM35,000 costs.
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. claims for defamation in a public and political context. (Para 1 , 10) |
| 2. the plaintiff's background and initiation of the defamation claim. (Para 2 , 3 , 4 , 5) |
| 3. the nature of the impugned statements and their defamatory implications. (Para 11 , 13 , 14) |
| 4. measurement of defamatory impact and public perception. (Para 12 , 26) |
| 5. discussion on defenses such as qualified privilege. (Para 19 , 20 , 21 , 25) |
| 6. discussion on the defences raised and their applicability. (Para 28 , 55 , 60) |
| 7. the court's conclusion on the defamation claim and the damages awarded. (Para 92 , 96 , 101) |
[1] The plaintiff claims against the defendant for an order:-
(a) pursuant to the jurisdictional powers of this Honourable Court under s 53 Specific Relief Act 1950 and under its inherent jurisdiction, a mandatory injunction be issued to compel the defendant to print and publish an unconditional apology to the plaintiff within seven days from the pronouncement of the judgment, wherein the apology must be published in a conspicuous section of the Berita Harian daily;
(b) the defendant be ordered to pay the plaintiff general damages, which includes aggravated damages and exemplary damages;
(c) the defendant be ordered to pay interest where the amount awarded as damages at the rate specified by this Honourable Court;
(d) the defendant be ordered to pay costs to the plaintiff;
(e) and other reliefs and/or orders deemed appropriate, proper and just by this Honourable Court.
The Plaintiff's Case
[2] The plaintiff was at all material times the Chief Minister of Pulau Pinang. The plaintiff also holds the position of Secretary General in the registered political organisation known as Democratic Action Party (DAP).
[3] The defendant was at material times the printer, publisher and distributor of a Malay language daily known as Berita Harian. Berita Harian commands huge readership and subscription with extensive circulation in Peninsular Malaysia.
[4] On 13 December 2012, the plaintiff instituted a Civil Suit No: 22NCvC- 853-12-2012 in the High Court of Penang against Dato' Dr Shaik Hussein Mydin, who was then the Chief of the UMNO Youth Wing in Penang. The cause of action arose from a defamatory statement made by him against the plaintiff at a press conference on 5 January 2012.
[5] The case was scheduled for full trial on 19 August 2015 before the Honorable Judicial Commissioner Dato' Nordin Hassan of High Court (5), Penang. However, on the trial date, the High Court was notified that the plaintiff and the said Dato' Dr Shaikh Hussein Mydin have amicably resolved the dispute and intended to record a Consent Judgment.
[6] The Consent Judgment was recorded and spelled out in precision and clarity the following terms:-
(i) that Dato' Dr Shaikh Hussein Mydin shall unconditionally and unreservedly retract the defamatory statements he made against the plaintiff in a press conference convened on 5 October 2012, where the statements read:-
(a) "Dan saya berasakan dan saya tidak menuduh, saya tidak menuduh, saya berasakan dia (plainitif) telah mengambil rasuah daripada Dental, Kuala Lumpur International Dental Hospital", and
(b) "To Chief Minister of Penang, please don't waste our time. We are busy untuk menepati janji. Dia busy untuk menipu. Dia memang tipu." and
(ii) that the plaintiff shall withdraw or discontinue the civil action against Dato' Dr Shaikh Hussein Mydin in pursuance of the above retraction.
[7] The terms of the Consent Judgment were read out in open Court by the plaintiff's counsel before the learned Judicial Commissioner
[8] During the proceeding, numerous journalists and reporters from various media agencies were present in the Court. One of them was a journalist under the employment of the defendant for the Berita Harian daily. After the proceeding, the plaintiff was approached by journalists and members of media. On their requests, the plaintiff handed them draft copies of the Consent Judgment.
[9] Then on 20 August 2015, the defendant pr
