Sessions court judge Monica Linsua ruled that the company's statement, when read as a whole, did not convey that Albert Tei was part of a political campaign.

Sessions court judge Monica Linsua ruled on Aug 21 that Tei failed to establish the defamatory elements in his claim.
Tei has sued the company in August last year for falsely linking him to a conspiracy to damage the company’s reputation and that of its CEO, as well as document tampering.
However the judge said that the company’s statement, when read as a whole, did not convey that Tei was part of a political campaign. She said the main issue was whether the statement that Tei was involved in “a broader campaign to damage the company and its officers” was defamatory.
“There is a difference between saying that the allegations may be politically motivated and saying that the plaintiff (Tei) was involved in a political campaign,” the judge said.
She said the statement did not expressly say that Tei was part of such a campaign. The words ‘could be’ and ‘may be’, read in the context of the whole statement, show that the company was expressing its belief on the circumstances surrounding the allegations, she said.
Monica ordered Tei to pay SMM RM25,000 in costs.
SMM was represented by Roger Chin, while Tei was represented by Chong Kian Ming. - FMT

No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.