MALAYSIA Trends and Developments Contributed by: Dhinesh Bhaskaran, Rabindra Nathan, Shanti Mogan and Lai Wai Fong, Shearn Delamore & Co
obligations to merely assert that the debt is dis- puted. Further, this would defeat any genuine presentation of a winding-up petition and would result in an abuse of the court process. Half-Truths in Defamation On 5 June 2024, the Federal Court in Seema Elizabeth Isoy v Tan Sri David Chiu Tat-Cheong [2024] 5 AMR 341 (“Seema Elizabeth”) consid- ered the applicability of the common law doc- trine of half-truths in the context of defamation law. Seema Elizabeth involved the sending of a mes- sage by the appellant in a WhatsApp group chat consisting of the owners of Waldorf & Windsor Tower Serviced Apartments (“W&W”) stating that the respondent (who is the founder and chairman of Malaysia Land Properties Sdn Bhd (“Mayland”)) had been arrested and charged for conspiracy to falsify documents and plotting to defraud. The appellant also mentioned that May- land had been convicted of fraud and misrepre- sentation against the W&W owners at all levels of the courts. The appellant invited the reader to Google the names to read more. The respondent sued the appellant for defama- tion, claiming that the message in its ordinary and natural meaning suggested he was a con- victed fraudster, dishonest and untrustworthy, and lowered his reputation. He sought special, general and exemplary damages. The High Court, after full trial, dismissed the respondent’s claim and accepted the appellant’s defence that the message was not defamatory as it was substantially true and it was not sent maliciously. However, the Court of Appeal overturned the High Court’s decision and held that the mes-
sage was defamatory and it was sent maliciously as the appellant deliberately left out the fact that the respondent was acquitted of the charges. The Court of Appeal found that the appellant had posted a half-truth statement, which was unfair. The Federal Court thereafter held that the delib- erate non-disclosure that the respondent had been acquitted tainted his character. The failure to disclose the full truth placed a different com- plexion and effect on the message. The omission to reveal that the respondent was acquitted of the charge, made the half-truth statement false in substance. The Federal Court also found that the message was sent maliciously and that if the whole truth was revealed, it would have shone a different light on the message when read. This decision shows that the importance of being fair when making statements as the con- sequences of omitting crucial facts could make a half-truth defamatory. This is especially true in this day and age where the sending of messages in WhatsApp groups is common. Still Feeling the Effects Of COVID-19 The legal after effects of COVID-19 continue in Malaysia. In October 2024, a suit was filed by eight Malaysians against the Prime Minister of Malaysia, former Prime Ministers of Malaysia, the Government of Malaysia, the Health Minis- try, the World Health Organization and 19 others over alleged health complications and deaths which were caused by the COVID-19 vaccines. The plaintiffs allege that they were adversely affected by the government mandating the pro- vision of vaccines during the pandemic. Some of the allegations consist of an individual dying after receiving three doses of the vaccine and another individual suffering a stroke after two doses of the vaccine. Two of the plaintiffs allege
903 CHAMBERS.COM
Powered by FlippingBook