DING MING MING v 1. ) LIM SU JIN 2. ) LIM SU LING

Case Significance

A worked example of social-media defamation liability: private-audience, truth, fair-comment and qualified-privilege defences all failed on the evidence, and the court combined substantial damages with removal, injunction and published-apology orders while dismissing an unsupported counterclaim.

This High Court decision at Johor Bahru concerns a defamation claim arising from social-media publications, and results in judgment for the plaintiff after the defendants' defences failed. The plaintiff, a beautician and certified acupuncturist, sued two defendants — siblings who were her former customers — over Facebook and WhatsApp publications in February 2020. She alleged that the first defendant, using a Facebook account, posted statements that she lacked proper qualifications, practised without legitimacy, and had caused serious medical complications to the second defendant following a thread-embedding acupuncture procedure, and that the second defendant circulated similar statements by WhatsApp to a business associate of the plaintiff. The defendants denied liability, contending that the posts were private communications visible only to friends, that the plaintiff's translations were inaccurate, and that the statements were substantially true, fair comment, or made on an occasion of qualified privilege; they also counterclaimed that the plaintiff had defamed them. The trial, which began before one judge and resumed before another after a transfer, addressed whether the statements were defamatory, referred to the plaintiff and were published to third parties, and whether any defence was made out. The court found that the statements were defamatory of the plaintiff, referred to her and were published to third parties, and that the defendants had failed to establish justification, fair comment or qualified privilege. It entered judgment for the plaintiff, awarding a global sum of RM350,000 in general, aggravated and exemplary damages payable jointly and severally, while disallowing special damages for want of proof. The court also ordered the defendants to remove the offending Facebook posts, comments and WhatsApp communications, granted an injunction against further publication, ordered a signed written apology to be published, awarded interest at 5% per annum from judgment and costs of RM50,000, and dismissed the counterclaim with costs.