Yusoff J:

This is an application for leave by the plaintiff to serve interrogatories on the defendant, relating to a libel action alleging that the defendant had published defamatory reports in newspapers against the plaintiff.

The interrogatories sought are in respect of further publication by the defendant of the alleged reports to other newspapers.

The defendant objected to this application on the ground that the pleading in this action has been closed and that discovery would not normally be allowed after the pleading closed and action set for trial. He cited Ellis v. Ambler [1877] 36 LT 410. In my view the Court may with leave allow interrogatories at any stage of the pleading provided that a party who exhibited unreasonably, may be condemned to bear the cost of such application.

In this application the plaintiff's statement of claim is endorsed at para. 7 therof that:-

The defendant wrote and published the said news message to various persons in Malaysia and Singapore and same was printed and published in several newspapers circulating in Malaysia and Singapore.

The defendant is a statutory body with one of the objects to distribute informations, news or news materials or features to subscribers who have entered into arrangements with the defendant - see ss. 4 and 16 of the Pertubohan Berita Nasional Malaysia (Bernama) Act of 1967.

The names of the subscribers to the news distributed by the defendant are only known to the defendant himself. The plaintiff would not have knowledge of this information. In Millar v. Harper CA [1888] 38 Ch. D 110 it was held that where the defendant has means of knowing the facts in dispute and the plaintiff has not, the defendant is not entitled to particulars until after he is given discovery.

Also in London & Provincial Marine Insurance Co. v. Davies (1877) 5 Ch D 775 it was held that:

Though great delay had taken place, leave was given to file interrogatories after the close of the pleadings; costs of the application to be costs in the cause.

In the present application basing on these authorities I would allow for interrogatories be served upon the defendant and for the reason that the applicant has unreasonably delayed this application, I would award costs to the defendant in any event.

From the above ruling the defendant appealed to the Federal Court.

FEDERAL COURT

John Ko for the appellant.

TO Thomas for the respondent.

JUDGMENT

Chang Min Tat (delivering the judgment of the Court) FJ:

At the hearing we allowed the appeal stating that we would give our reasons more fully. We now do so.

The respondent took out a suit for libel in March 1973 against the defendant. In his statement of claim, the words complained of were:

Chairman of the Sarawak National Party, Dato' Stephen Ningkan told the High Court here today that SNAP received $145,000 donations from Kong Thai Sawmill (Miri) Sdn. Bhd.

. ...

Cross-examined by Mr. C Darvall, for the respondents, Dato Ningkan said he was aware that money was paid to political parties.

SNAP is the acronym of the Sarawak National Party. The respondent was at all relevant times the chairman. He holds other offices and several distinctions. He was from 1963-1966 the Chief Minister of Sarawak. He is a well-known personality. The appellant is a news agency incorporated under statute and is generally known by another acronym Bernama. It operates by collecting news items which it then circulates amongst newspapers for publication. The words complained of appeared in the Straits Times of 19 April 1972. The appellant admitted publishing that report to the Straits Times but would not admit doing so to various persons, as claimed by the respondent, in Malaysia and Singapore. As for that, it would put the respondent to "strict proof thereof".

For some considerable time, it did not seem very material to the respondent's case that he should know the various other persons to whom publication was made. It was also quite clear from his statem