Defamation requires proof that statements expose a party to hatred or contempt; mere repetition of allegations does not provide a valid defense.

Hadhariah Syed Ismail JCA:

Introduction

[1] The appeal by the appellants (the 1st, 3rd and 4th defendants) is against the decision of the High Court given on 26 January 2018, allowing the respondent's (the plaintiff) defamation claim. The prayer sought for are damages and injunction.

[2] Originally, the respondent had two causes of action against the appellants, namely defamation and conspiracy to injure the respondent. The claim for conspiracy to injure the respondent was dismissed by the High Court. There is no cross-appeal by the respondent. Therefore, this judgment is confined to the defamation claim.

[3] The claim in defamation was premised on the publication of three documents in the Tamil newspaper known as Tamil Malar, namely:

(i) An article dated 4 June 2015 (1st Article);

(ii) A caricature dated 4 June 2015 (Caricature); and

(iii) An article dated 16 July 2015 (2nd Article)

(hereinafter referred to as "the Publications")

[4] The appellants were sued in their respective capacities as the publisher, managing director & editor and journalist of the Tamil Malar. The suit was also filed against the printer of Tamil Malar (the 2nd defendant), but was withdrawn by the respondent before the trial started.

[5] Based on paras 7, 8, 12, 13 and 14 of the Statement of Agreed Facts (enc 15 pp 260-264), the appellants admitted that the Publications refer to the respondent and that.it was the appellants who published the Publications.

[6] Consequently, at the trial, the respondent only need to prove that the Publications contained defamatory imputation.

[7] The appellants denied that the words used in the Publications were defamatory of the respondent. The defenses raised are justification, qualified privilege and freedom of speech under art 10 of the Federal Constitution.

[8] After the trial, the High Court found in favour of the respondent and make the following orders:

(a) The appellants were restrained from inter alia, writing, facilitating and publishing and/or causing to be written or published the defamatory words complained of in the Publications;

(b) The 1st appellant (1st defendant) to pay to the respondent general damages, aggravated damages and exemplary damages in the sum of RM300,000.00;

(c) The 2nd appellant (3rd defendant) to pay to the respondent general damages, aggravated damages and exemplary damages in the sum of RM200,000.00;

(d) The 3rd appellant (4th defendant) to pay to the respondent general damages, aggravated damages and exemplary damages in the sum of RM70,000.00; and

.

(e) The appellants to pay costs of RM220,000.00 to the respondent subject to allocatur.

Brief Background Facts

[9] The respondent is the Chairman of the Board of Management and the Executive Committee of the Sri Maha Mariamman Temple Charity (Dhevasthanam) for the past 22 years (since 1992). As Chairman, he is also a member of the Board of Management and the Executive Committee.

[10] By Order of Court dated 28 November 1930 (1930 Order), the Dhevasthanam was constituted as a religious charitable trust comprising:- (i) the Sri Subramaniar Temple, Batu Caves; (ii) Sri Maha Mariamman Temple, High Street; and (iii) the Sri Ganesar Temple, Old Pudu Road, for the benefit of the Ubayakarars (worshipper cum donor) of the Mariamman Temple (Religious Trust).

[11] The 1930 Order also provided that the property and funds of the said trust were vested in the Trustees to be appointed and removed from time to time and to be managed and controlled by the Board of Management.

[12] By Court Order dated 25 May 1981 (1981 Order), a scheme for the management and regulation of the Dhevasthanam (Scheme) was approved and affirmed by Court Order dated 27 April 2017.

[13] As per the Scheme, the sole prerogative of determining the management of the funds and affairs of the Dhevasthanam was vested in the Board of Management as follows:-

(i) the Chairman elected by the Board of Management shall superintend the general administration of the affairs of the Dhevasthanam;

(ii) all the move