Gopal Sri Ram JCA (Majority):

[1] This appeal raises a short but interesting point in the context of private international law. It has to do with whether the High Court in Malaya has jurisdiction to try the plaintiffs' action for libel against the defendant. There is of course no new point of law here. It is merely a matter of applying settled principles to the particular facts of this case. And those facts, in so far as relevant to the narrow point here, may be shortly stated.

[2] On 3 September 1996 the second defendant sent a facsimile message addressed to the second plaintiff at Kuala Lumpur. It was transmitted to the fax number of the first plaintiff also at Kuala Lumpur. It was sent out of London. It was prepared on the letterhead of the second defendant. It was signed by the first defendant. On its face, it appears to have been copied to four other persons. (Two of these persons are within Malaysia.) That is to say, they are within the jurisdiction of the High Court. Of that there is no dispute.

[3] It is the plaintiffs' case that the facsimile message in question contains defamatory matter. They therefore instituted the present action against the defendants. Their clai