SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2024 MarsdenLR 863

HIGH COURT MALAYA KUALA LUMPUR
ONG JENN CHNAN – Appellant
Versus
METROPOLITAN TV SDN BHD – Respondent
[Suit No: WA-23NCvC-48-08-2019]



Petitioner Advocates:Y Yogeswaran,Khaw Yit Hoa,Teh Han Ker ,Respondent Advocate: Lim Qi Si,Chuah Min Yi,Sufiah Yusoff

In defamation cases, the Plaintiff must prove that the statements were defamatory, referred to him, and were published to third parties; failure to do so results in dismissal of the claim.

Headnote:(A) Defamation Act 1957 - Elements of defamation - The Plaintiff's claim for defamation was dismissed as he failed to prove that the Impugned Broadcast referred to him or was capable of being defamatory. The court emphasized the need for the Plaintiff to establish that the statements were defamatory, referred to him, and published to third parties. (Paras 13, 25, 54)

(B) Identification in defamation - The court found that the Plaintiff's name was never mentioned in the broadcast, and the inclusion of his details did not suffice to establish that the broadcast referred to him. (Paras 14, 22)

(C) Burden of proof - The Plaintiff bore the burden of proof to demonstrate that the Impugned Broadcast lowered his reputation among right-thinking members of society, which he failed to do. (Paras 25, 54)

Facts of the case:
The Plaintiff alleged defamation due to a news broadcast regarding an investment scheme, claiming it portrayed him as the mastermind of the scheme. (Paras 2-4)

Findings of Court:
The court found that the Plaintiff did not establish the necessary elements for defamation, and the broadcast did not imply that he was involved in any wrongdoing. (Paras 54)

Issues: The main issues were whether the broadcast referred to the Plaintiff and whether it was defamatory. (Paras 14, 25)

Ratio Decidendi: The court ruled that the Plaintiff failed to prove that the broadcast referred to him, and thus, his claim for defamation could not succeed. (Paras 54)

Result: Plaintiff's claim dismissed with costs.

JUDGMENT

(After Trial)

John Lee Kien How @ Mohd Johan Lee J:

Introduction

[1] This is the Plaintiff's claim ('this Claim') for damages against the Defendant for an alleged defamatory statement broadcasted during 8TV Chinese News Program aired by the Defendant ('the Impugned Broadcast').

Facts Of The Case

[2] On 2 March 2019, the Defendant aired a news report regarding an investment scheme known as the BTC I-system carried out by a trading group known as North Gemilang Dua Gemilang Trading ('North Gemilang'). When the Impugned Broadcast was aired, there was a segment that showed photographs of certain individuals (with part of the face blurred out) together with their names, identity card numbers, and addresses.

[3] The Plaintiff claimed that one of the photographs shown in the Impugned Broadcast was his and the alleged defamatory statement can be seen by the transcript uttered by the newscaster in Mandarin. The English translation for the transcript ('the Transcript') is as follows:

"Organized group to inspect the investment project in Vietnam. Swindler had crazily cheated RM8 millions of hard-earned money."

"High return investment scams are often heard nowadays and this time, an investment company wanted to appease their investors where they were worried about the delayed investment return and they were brought to visit the so called resort and casino which was invested by the company. Those investors had regained their confidence and chosen to give another chance to the company, unfortunately it was futile in the end, the person in-charge refused to accept call and there were more than hundreds of people unable to get their return back and even their principle sum, the estimation of loss is more than RM8 million.

Madam Tan from Penang got to know the person in-charge of one Investment Company called North Gemilang Dua Dua Trading upon introduced by her friend on January 2017 and she was attracted with its BTC I-system project where she can earn high return of 20% rate of return on such investment. Therefore she invested RM350,000.00 in succession within February and March.

However nothing happened after she had waited for several months. She began to feel suspicious. However after a while, the relevant company has brought the investors to Vietnam to visit the resort and casino which were invested by its subsidiary company. Such step had regained Madam Tan's confidence, unfortunately nothing happened in the subsequent year and when the victims indicated that they wanted to lodge police report, only then the relevant investment company distributed interest of RM16,500.00 to their investors, however unexpectedly they enjoyed the sweetness for only 3 months and after that, there was no news anymore and the person in-charge also had disappeared and all the group chats had been closed. The investment fund by hundreds of people was suspected gone.

People there were also being cheated, that involved million of ringgits also. After that, he (person in-charge) said after the condition of the company has been stabilized, he will compensate the money to us, however it was never done. After that the said group chat was also closed. They had 1 group chat at that point in time, yes, it was a WeChat group chat and it had been closed. There were 2 hundred plus people in that group.

I hope he will pay back the money and I hope other people don't be so greedy, this is because high return investment wouldn't be true.

The victim also added, the minimum investment offered by the relevant company is USD$1,000, approximately RM4,000.00 after being converted, the relevant investment group which was participated by her, investment fund involved up to USD$2 million, which is around RM8 million. Such big sum of fund does not include other investment groups; therefore it can be seen that there were many people that had been cheated. Head of Public Service and Complaints Department of Penang Front Party, Henry Ong accompanied the 5 victims to Simpang Ampat Police Stat

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top