Terrence Lee & Co

On the court record

The firm's record illustrates the reference and malice requirements in defamation, including the Lucas-Box and Reynolds defences, and the treatment of forgery and digital evidence such as metadata and WhatsApp messages in a contractual dispute.

Terrence Lee & Co appears in the corpus as counsel in defamation, contract and commercial litigation, argued in the High Court (Mahkamah Tinggi) and the Court of Appeal (Mahkamah Rayuan).

In defamation the firm acted for the appellant in a claim involving The Edge Communication Sdn Bhd, where the court considered whether an impugned paragraph referred to the plaintiff, whether the plaintiff had been defamed, the significance of an article referring to a group of individuals and the concept of particeps criminis, the particulars of malice required under Order 78 rule 3(3) of the Rules of Court 2012, and the defences of justification and qualified privilege, including the Lucas-Box and Reynolds principles and the plaintiff's election not to take an opportunity to respond.

In contract the firm acted for the plaintiff in a dispute over a friendly loan agreement involving a substantial cash withdrawal, where the court examined the burden of proof and document authenticity under sections 91, 92 and 103 of the Evidence Act 1950, allegations of signature forgery and digital manipulation, the weight of contemporaneous documentation, photographic evidence and metadata verification, WhatsApp communications, the parol-evidence rule and the liability of a non-signatory.

The firm also appeared in commercial-procedure and corporate work. In one matter, acting for the defendant against GIIB Holdings Berhad, it resisted a discovery application under Order 24 of the Rules of Court 2012, the court considering whether delay was fatal, whether the application was a fishing expedition, and whether the documents sought were relevant and necessary given a cause of action grounded on the tort of conspiracy to injure. In another, argued in Malay and involving South Malaysia Industries Berhad, it appeared for the defendant in a dispute over the sale of shares and control of a listed company, engaging an interim injunction, the role of the Securities Commission and the administration of takeovers under the securities legislation. The firm's record is a broad commercial and reputational litigation practice.