JUDGMENT

Mohd Nazlan Mohd Ghazali JCA:

Introduction

[1] This appeal arises from the dismissal of the appellants' claim for defamation and malicious falsehood against the respondents for the published statements issued by the 3rd respondent at a press conference held in respect of its seizure of alleged counterfeit goods which the appellants claimed belonged to them.

[2] Having heard the appeal - which was conducted via Zoom video technology - examined the appeal records and considered the submissions by parties, we unanimously decided to dismiss the appeal and affirm the judgment of the High Court.

[3] These grounds of judgment contain the full reasons for our decision.

Key Background Facts The Parties

[4] The appellants are a group of companies that are primarily involved in the business of manufacturing and trading of fire-resistant door sets, safety, fire-fighting equipment, and other industrial products. The 1st respondent was at the material time the Director of the Enforcement Division of the former Ministry of Domestic Trade and Consumer Affairs - the 3rd respondent.

The Impugned Statements

[5] The 3rd respondent's Enforcement Division, on the basis of a complaint against the 2nd app