James Foong J:

[1] The lst plaintiffs are a Singapore registered company while the 2nd plaintiffs are a Malaysian company. They both market high quality European furniture primarily from Italy in Singapore and Malaysia and use the trade name 'Le Mercier' originated from its founders and current owners of both the plaintiffs. According to Mr Mercier (PW1), he and his wife have been trading in this type of business for the past 14 years, initially in Singapore and then extended to Malaysia, which eventually led to the formation of both the plaintiffs. In March 1994, the 2nd plaintiffs set up their show room in Kuala Lumpur, one of the largest in this country for this type of trade.

[2] The defendants, as claimed by the plaintiffs are engaged in similar trade and had started their business in 1992 with a display centre in Kuala Lumpur.

[3] On 2 July 1994, the defendants took out an advertisement in the New Straits Times 'City Extra' section to publicise their products which are marketed through their trade name. 'Abita Italia'. Besides the prominent display of the defendants' logo and trade name, and surrounded by various items of their products, at the top left hand column bears the following words;

[4] Italy leading supplier of fine Italian furniture ABITA ITALIA, is the only genuine Italian display centre in Kuala Lumpur.

[5] The plaintiffs immediately took offence to this, claiming that not only is the above statement untrue, but also by their natural and ordinary and/or inferential meaning were understood to mean that "all other display centres, including the show room (2nd plaintiffs') were not genuine in that they carried fake and/or imitation Italian furniture while declaring the same to be genuine" and/or "all other entities running display centres carrying Italian furniture, including the plaintiffs', were dishonest and/or otherwise engaged in activities of a fraudulent nature." They insisted that the above statement refers to them, or any one of them. Further, and/or in the alternative, by way of innuendo, the above statement "were understood to refer to the plaintiffs or any one of them, as dishonest and/or dealing in fake and/or imitation items of Italian furniture purportedly as genuine Italian furniture and the plaintiffs, or any one of them, in doing so, attempted to and did in fact cheat its clients." Under para 12 of the statement of claim, it is asserted that, "the plaintiffs have been seriously injured in their credit and reputation and/or have otherwise been reduced in the estimation of right thinking members of the public."

[6] The defendants though admitting that they did publish the above statement deny that by its natural and ordinary and/or inferential meaning it is defamatory nor refer to the plaintiffs. They also deny innuendo arise by reason of some special knowledge available to those to whom the words were published or by reason of some special meaning or inference to be attached to or drawn from the words in the said statement. They contend that "the words, 'the only genuine Italian display centre' describes Abita Italia as a display centre in Kuala Lumpur which displays only Italian furniture." This is for reason that the defendants" furniture sold in their display centre are exclusively Italian in that they do not sell, supply and/or display any other furniture apart from furniture of Italian origin. They feel that no reasonable and sensible reader of the advertisement would believe that the above statement refers to the plaintiffs and that the plaintiffs are not synonymous with Italian furniture. The defendants also deny that the plaintiffs have been seriously injured in their credibility and reputation.