Kwek Juan Bok Lawrence v Lim Han Yong

JurisdictionSingapore
JudgeChan Sek Keong J
Judgment Date13 June 1989
Neutral Citation[1989] SGHC 55
Docket NumberSuit No 402 of 1989
Date13 June 1989
Year1989
Published date19 September 2003
Plaintiff CounselHarry Elias (Harry Elias & Partners) and Ng Su-Ran (Chow Peng & Partners)
Citation[1989] SGHC 55
Defendant CounselRama L Kasi (WT Woon & Co)
CourtHigh Court (Singapore)
Subject MatterWhether English authorities applicable in Singapore,Freedom of speech,Injunction,Civil Procedure,Injunctions,Effect on interlocutory injunction to restrain libel where justification pleaded,Constitutional Law,Equitable jurisdiction of court to grant interlocutory injunctions,s 3(a) Civil Law Act (Cap 43),Fundamental liberties,Interlocutory injunction to restrain defamatory statements,Remedies,Equity

Cur adv vult

This is an application by LKJB (the plaintiff) for an interlocutory injunction to restrain LHY (the defendant) whether by himself or his servants or agents from further publishing an alleged libel, that is to say, the words set out in the statement of claim in Suit No 199 of 1989 or words to the like effect. The statement of claim of 11 paragraphs set out a number of allegations by LHY (the plaintiff in that action) that LKJB (the defendant in that action) had induced LHY to invest in a company called Sunrean Natorny Goods Pte Ltd and to become its managing director (and thereby to give up alternative employment) and that in so doing had acted negligently or had misrepresented to LHY fraudulently the economic prospects of the said company as a result of which LHY has suffered loss. LKJB has filed a defence and counterclaim in Suit No 199 of 1989 denying the allegations of LHY and counterclaiming the sum of $50,000 being the unpaid consideration for the 50,000 shares in the company which LKJB has sold to LHY.

The present action was commenced by LKJB against LHY on 1 March 1989 for, inter alia, damages for libel after LHY had on or about 16 February 1989 sent a copy of the writ endorsed with the statement of claim in Suit No 199 of 1989 to the Head of Employment Service Department, Ministry of Labour.
The publication of the statement of claim after its filing is not denied by LHY. He has however maintained that he did not do it with malice as he thought that he was entitled to do so on the ground that court documents are public documents. He has also filed a defence in this action in which he maintains that the allegations in the statement of claim are not capable of being and are not defamatory of LKJB, but that if they are, they are true in substance and in fact. Qualified privilege and fair comment have also been pleaded in the defence. Apart from the defence, it should also be noted that the statement of claim in Suit No 199 of 1989 is in itself an assertion that the matters alleged therein are true as they form the basis of LHY`s action against LKJB. The application before me has been argued on one point only, that is whether the plaintiff is entitled to an interlocutory injunction to restrain the defendant from publishing the alleged libellous statements when the defendant has pleaded justification by way of defence.

Counsel for LKJB concedes that the English authorities on the point beginning with the decision of the Court of Appeal in Bonnard v Perryman [1891] 2 Ch D 269 are against him.
...

To continue reading

Request your trial
7 cases
  • Chin Bay Ching v Merchant Ventures Pte Ltd
    • Singapore
    • Court of Appeal (Singapore)
    • 17 May 2005
    ...Edelsten v John Fairfax & Sons Ltd [1978] 1 NSWLR 685, McSweeney v Berryman [1980] 2 NZLR 168 and Kwek Juan Bok Lawrence v Lim Han Yong [1989] SLR 655 (“Lawrence Kwek”), the last being a Singapore 34 In Bestobell Paints Ltd v Bigg [1975] FSR 421 (“Bestobell Paints”), Oliver J at 429–430 exp......
  • Tang Yoke Kheng (trading as Niklex Supply Co) v Lek Benedict and Others
    • Singapore
    • High Court (Singapore)
    • 28 April 2004
    ...made”. The latter is the basis of the court’s jurisdiction to grant interlocutory injunctions: see Kwek Juan Bok Lawrence v Lim Han Yong [1989] SLR 655. Anton Piller orders and Mareva injunctions are issued under sub-paras 5(a) and (c) of the First Schedule to the Supreme Court of Judicatur......
  • X Pte Ltd and Another v CDE
    • Singapore
    • High Court (Singapore)
    • 28 August 1992
    ... ... remarks intends to justify the truth of his statements: see Lawrence Kwek Juan Bok v Lim Han Yong [1989] 3 MLJ 210 Mr Tan agreed that the ... ...
  • Koh Sin Chong Freddie v Chan Cheng Wah Bernard
    • Singapore
    • Court of Appeal (Singapore)
    • 26 August 2013
    ...John v MGN Ltd [1997] QB 586 (refd) Knupffer v London Express Newspaper Ltd [1944] AC 116 (refd) Kwek Juan Bok Lawrence v Lim Han Yong [1989] 1 SLR (R) 675; [1989] SLR 655 (refd) Lee Ching v Lau May Ming [2007] HKCU 714 (refd) Lee Hsien Loong v Singapore Democratic Party [2009] 1 SLR (R) 64......
  • Request a trial to view additional results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT