Choor Singh J

This is a defamation action brought by Mr. C.S. Wu an advocate and solicitor, arising out of a news report published in the New Nation of November 12, 1975.

The facts are these. The plaintiff is and has been for many years an advocate and solicitor practising such profession in Singapore as a partner in the law firm of Donaldson & Burkinshaw. The first and second defendants were at the material time journalists and the third defendants are and were at the material time publishers of the New Nation, a newspaper having a large circulation in Singapore.

On November 12, 1975 the first and second defendants wrote and caused to be printed and the third defendants printed on the front page of the issue of the New Nation dated that day of and concerning the plaintiff in the way of the said profession the words following:

"Big probe on lawyers

By Francis Rozario and Wang Look Fung.

The Chief Justice, Mr. Wee Chang Jin, has ordered the Law Society to conduct an inquiry into the professional conduct of lawyer Foe See Juan over the disposal of at least $2 million worth of assets of a property development company.

This follows an originating summons taken out by Mr. Tay Beng Swee, chairman and managing director of the company, Sin Chew Realty Pte. Ltd. heard in chambers before the Chief Justice on October 24.

A similar summons taken out by Mr. Toy against another lawyer, Mr. C.S. Wu of Donaldson & Burkinshaw, is scheduled to he heard in chambers at a later date.

This is the first time in legal history that a member of the public has taken out such a summons against the Law Society of Singapore.

Mr. Tay had originally made a complaint against the two lawyers to the Law Society in April last year, which later informed him that there ‘was no substance in the complaint.'

In its reply to Mr. Tay's complaint, the Council of the Law Society said: The inquiry committee has received a number of complaints arising out of what is clearly a dispute between the directors of a company known as Sin Chew Realty Pte. Ltd.

It appears to the inquiry committee that some of these complaints have almost certainly been made not primarily with a view to the institution of disciplinary proceeding but with a view to the enforcement of the civil fights of the parties without the necessity of their resorting to court.

So far as the complaint of Mr. Tay Beng Swee against Mr. C.S. Wu and Mr. Foe See Juan are concerned, the inquiry committee can find nothing of substance which could in any way justify disciplinary proceedings although the facts do disclose a number of possible claims'."

The plaintiff alleges that the said publication was false and malicious and that the words in their material and ordinary meaning meant and were understood to mean

(1) that the plaintiff in the exercise of his profession had been guilty of such conduct as to necessitate an inquiry with a view to his being struck off or suspended;

(2) that the plaintiff similarly to Mr. Foo See Juan, another lawyer, had conducted himself unprofessionally in the wrongful disposal of at least $2 million worth of assets of a property development company.

The headlines of the article complained of namely "Big Probe on Lawyers" were in letters approximately ¾' to 1' in height at the front page of the issue and there also appeared immediately below the said headlines one photograph only, namely a photograph of the plaintiff measuring 6' x 2' with the name "Mr. Wu" thereunder.

The plaintiff alleges that the juxtaposition of his photograph immediately under the said headlines was such as to bear the innuendo

(1) that there was on foot an investigation into the professional conduct of the plaintiff;

(2) that such investigation related to a serious or grave matter;

(3) that the plaintiff's conduct merited such investigation;

(4) that the plaintiff was the principal subject of the probe.

The plaintiff alleges that by reason of the premises he has been injured in his credit and professional reputa