Jasmin Nisban v Chan Boon Siang and others

• Jurisdiction: Singapore
• Judge: Tan May Tee
• Judgment Date: 31 July 2023
• Neutral Citation: [2023] SGDC 158
• Court: District Court (Singapore)
• Docket Number: District Court Suit No 556 of 2016
• Hearing Date: 26 October 2021,08 September 2021,09 September 2021,10 September 2021,06 September 2021,26 July 2021,27 July 2021,28 July 2021,29 July 2021,30 July 2021,12 April 2021,13 April 2021,05 April 2021,06 April 2021,07 April 2021,08 April 2021,09 April 2021,01 February 2021,02 February 2021,03 February 2021,04 February 2021,05 February 2021,07 October 2022
• Citation: [2023] SGDC 158
• Year: 2023
• Plaintiff Counsel: Lau Kok Keng, Quek Yi Liang Daniel, and Lim Jia Yi Edina (Rajah & Tann Singapore LLP)
• Defendant Counsel: Wong Tjen Wee and Nicholas Tan (Wong & Leow LLC),Raymond Wong (RWong Law Corporation)
• Subject Matter: Tort,Defamation,Defamatory Statements,Publication,Defences,Justification,Fair Comment,Qualified Privilege,Malice,Damages
• Published date: 12 August 2023

District Judge Tan May Tee: Introduction

This is a libel action which arose from a requisition for an extraordinary general meeting (“EOGM”) of the Singapore Chess Federation (“SCF”) in January 2016.

The plaintiff is a businessman. In January 2016, he was serving on the SCF Executive Council (“Exco” / “Council”¹) as the Honorary Treasurer². He had been elected to the post at the SCF’s annual general meeting (“AGM”) on 2 August 2015 together with ten other SCF members to serve a two-year term from August 2015 to July 2017.

Disagreements arose among the newly elected Council members and five of them resigned less than three months later, on 23 October 2015. On 6 January 2016, a requisition form (“the Requisition Request”) was sent to the SCF calling for an EOGM to be convened pursuant to the SCF Constitution in order to pass votes of no confidence against the President, his Council members and for a new Council to be elected. The Requisition Request was signed by a total of 51 requisitioners including the five Council members who had resigned on 23 October 2015. Their signatures were appended on seven sheets of paper (“the Signature Sheets”) dated 6 January 2016.

Accompanying the Requisition Request was an undated letter (“Requisition Letter”) which contained detailed reasons why the requisitioners were seeking to oust the President and the Council. One section of the Requisition Letter referred to the resignation of a female chess trainer, Anjela Khegay (“Khegay”), due to an incident on the SCF premises (“the Khegay Incident”). The incident was described as one which “involved two Council members” and which “involved sexual misconduct”. The plaintiff was named as one of the Council members “implicated” in the incident. The statements made in the Requisition Letter concerning the plaintiff as having been “implicated” in the sexual misconduct incident form the subject matter of this libel suit.

The defendants are among the 51 requisitioners. They challenge the plaintiff’s claim in all aspects and contend that this action is an abuse of process. The plaintiff had initially sued a total of 39 defendants. The trial proceeded against 21 defendants as the action was discontinued against 17 defendants who chose to settle with the plaintiff while one defendant failed to enter an appearance after being served. The 21 defendants comprise: the 1st, 2nd, 3rd, 6th, 8th, 10th, 12th, 13th, 15th, 18th, 19th, 20th, 21st, 23rd, 25th, 27th, 28th, 29th, 31st and 32nd defendants (“the 20 Defendants”) who are represented by Wong & Leow LLC; and the 36th defendant (“the 36th Defendant”) who is separately represented by RWong Law Corporation.

The court heard the testimonies of a total of 27 witnesses over a span of 22 days – the plaintiff called seven witnesses in support of his case while a total of 20 witnesses testified for the defendants.

After due consideration of the evidence, the detailed written submissions from counsel as well as having heard their further oral submissions, the court finds in favour of the plaintiff. The 20 Defendants and the 36th Defendant are jointly and severally liable in having defamed the plaintiff and are adjudged to pay the plaintiff damages in the total sum of $120,000. The full reasons for my decision are set out herein.

Background to the dispute

The event which spawned this litigation can be traced back to the SCF Exco elections at the AGM on 2 August 2015. The incumbent President³, Ignatius Leong Chee Weng (“Ignatius Leong” / “Leong”), was unexpectedly challenged for the top post and defeated. Leong had been the SCF President for the previous eight years (2007 to 2015) and been actively involved in chess for over 40 years both locally and internationally. His chess-related résumé was said to be unparalleled in the Singapore chess community as he had also served as General Secretary of the world governing body for chess, Fédération Internationale des Échecs (“FIDE”). By comparison, his opponent, Leonard Lau Aik Soon (“Leonard Lau” / “Lau”) who was one of the Vice-Presidents in the previous Council, did not have much of a standing in the chess community. Discord soon arose amongst the elected Council members that subsequently led to the Requisition Request to unseat Lau and his Council members, including the plaintiff.

For a contextual understanding of the issues in this case, this judgment starts with a recital of the Requisition Request and the Requisition Letter containing the alleged defamatory statements that are the subject of this suit. A description of the parties and personalities involved will follow together with a narrative of the key events that precipitated the concerted action of the group of requisitioners to effect a leadership change in the SCF barely six months after the new President was elected at the 2015 AGM.

The Requisition Request and the Requisition Letter with the alleged defamatory Statements

The Requestion Request requested the Council to convene an EOGM for the purpose of considering and, if thought fit, passing, with or without modification, the following three resolutions (“the Resolutions”), namely, that: There was no confidence in Mr Leonard Lau Aik Soon in his capacity as the (then) current President of the SCF; There was no confidence in each of the members of the (then) current Council in their respective capacities; and A new Council of the SCF be re-elected forthwith to serve out the remaining period of the 2015 to 2017 term.

The Requisition Request was ostensibly submitted pursuant to Article 11.1 of the SCF’s Constitution⁴, which provided that:

An Extraordinary General Meeting may be convened by the Council or on receipt of a written requisition by at least fifty (50) or 20% of Ordinary and/or Affiliation Members whichever is lower. The objects and reasons shall be stated in the requisition. Upon receipt of the requisition, the Council must convene an Extraordinary General Meeting to be held within twenty-eight (28) days from the date of receipt of such requisition. Requisitioning Members must hold membership for at least one (1) year.

The reasons for the Resolutions sought in the Requisition Request were included in the Requisition Letter. This was an undated letter of seven pages addressed to “Dear Esteemed Friends of the Chess Community” and began with the following:

On 23 October 2015, 5 of the 11 elected Council Members of the Singapore Chess Federation (SCF) for the term 2015 – 2017 had submitted their resignations, in view of the state of affairs in the Executive Council (EXCO) of SCF. We are writing to apprise you of the situation and to seek your views as to how the situation can be rescued.

The following paragraphs summarized a series of incidents that had happened in the last 2 months, which led to the resignations of 5 Council members.

Amongst the various incidents and reasons cited in the Requisition Letter was the Khegay Incident described under the title: “2. Resignation of SCF Trainer Ms Anjela Khegay”. The words in this section of the Requisition Letter included the following:

Ms Anjela Khegay, a full time Chess Trainer employed by SCF, resigned on 31 Aug 2015, on the basis of an incident that took place on 30 Aug 2015 at SCF’s Office in Bishan, that involved two Council members. She subsequently filed a police report on 1 Sep 2015 on the incident, which involved sexual misconduct in the premises of SCF.

Anjela, a Woman International Master (WIM) from Uzbekistan, has been employed as a chess trainer in Singapore since 1999. She subsequently became a SPR and joined the SCF as a chess trainer since Jan 2014. Throughout her stay and employment here, she had never engaged in any dispute with anyone till the incident on 30 Aug 2015.

The President of SCF received Anjela’s resignation notice and requested 2 VPs of SCF (Christopher Lim and Gan Yeow Beng) to conduct separate interviews with Anjela and the two Council members implicated (Tony Tan and Nisban Jasmin). As the 2 Council Members implicated were on overseas trips, the interviews were completed only on 14 Sep 2015. John Wong, another VP of SCF, joined the interview team for the sessions with the two Council members. Chris Lim, as Head of the interview team, informed the Council in an email on 15 Sep 2015 that the interviews had been completed and a report will be provided in the following few days.

The report was sent to the President of SCF on 23 Sep 2015 via email by Chris Lim, who asked the President to decide on the distributions or subsequent actions, due to the involvement of 2 Council members. Despite the gravity of this matter, one that involved sexual misconduct (verbal) in work place, the President did not reply and unilaterally decided to withhold the report from all Council members not involved in the incident. He stated in the Council Meeting of 22 Oct 2015 (continued from the session that was convened on 16 Oct 2015) that for sensitivity reasons, he will not release the report to the Council members not implicated in the case. He has absolutely no authority to do so.

We understand that Anjela is or may be pursuing the case through court proceedings. As this incident happened in the SCF, in the interest of the Federation, the Council should view this as a serious case affecting the reputation of the Federation, regardless of whether there will be follow-up actions by the court and Police. Anjela’s resignation is by no means a trivial issue but the lack of action on the part of the President appears to deem this case as such. This is highly unacceptable.

…

The words in bold in the paragraphs extracted above expressly referred to the plaintiff as well as another Council member, Tony Tan, by their names. It is the plaintiff’s case that the words in bold as extracted from the Requisition Letter (the “Statements”⁵) are defamatory of him in their natural and ordinary meaning.

The 20 Defendants...