Ling Yexiang v LYC MOTHER & CHILD CENTRE SDN BHD

Case Significance

Illustrates a corporate plaintiff's right to sue in defamation and how an appellate court reviews a defamation finding where the trial court gave no grounds: the statements must be shown to be defamatory, to refer to the plaintiff and to have been published, and only pleaded statements can found the claim.

This High Court decision at Shah Alam is an appeal in a defamation action brought by a confinement centre against a former customer's husband. The respondent, the plaintiff below, operated a confinement centre and was a subsidiary of a healthcare group; the appellant's wife had been a customer who stayed at the centre for twenty-eight days under a confinement package following her delivery, and the appellant was alleged to have published defamatory statements about the centre. The Sessions Court had allowed the plaintiff's claim after a full trial, but had produced no grounds of judgment because the trial judge had since retired, so the High Court had to review the decision without the benefit of the lower court's reasoning. On appeal the court examined, on the balance of probabilities, whether the statements complained of were defamatory of and referred to the plaintiff and had been published by the appellant. It found that the plaintiff had successfully proved that three of the statements were defamatory statements published by the appellant against it, while noting that certain further statements had not been pleaded in the statement of claim. The court considered the damages awarded by the Sessions Court and the orders made about the manner in which the appellant was to express an apology to be appropriate, given the adverse effects on the plaintiff, and it maintained the relevant paragraphs of the lower court's order and its costs order, leaving the parties to bear their own costs of the appeal. Delivered by Judicial Commissioner Hazizah Kassim, the judgment is a useful illustration of a corporate plaintiff's right to sue in defamation and of how an appellate court reconstructs and reviews a defamation finding where the trial court has given no grounds: the statements must be shown to be defamatory, to refer to the plaintiff and to have been published, and pleaded statements alone can found the claim.