TJ System v Ngow Kheong Shen: Defamation Claim for Email Alleging Bribery
TJ System (S) Pte Ltd, Ting Siew Hood, Leow Chin Bee, Wang Yong Hong, and Foong Kok Seng sued Ngow Kheong Shen in the High Court of Singapore for defamation based on an email he sent alleging bribery by TJ System. The court found the email defamatory and awarded damages to the plaintiffs. The hearing before the court was to assess the damages to be paid by the defendant to the five successful plaintiffs.
1. Case Overview
1.1 Court
High Court1.2 Outcome
Judgment for Plaintiffs
1.3 Case Type
Civil
1.4 Judgment Type
Grounds of Decision
1.5 Jurisdiction
Singapore
1.6 Description
Defamation claim by TJ System and directors against Ngow Kheong Shen for an email alleging bribery. The court awarded damages to the plaintiffs.
1.7 Decision Date
2. Parties and Outcomes
| Party Name | Role | Type | Outcome | Outcome Type | Counsels |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Ngow Kheong Shen | Defendant | Individual | Judgment against Defendant | Lost | |
| TJ System (S) Pte Ltd | Plaintiff | Corporation | Judgment for Plaintiff | Won | |
| Ting Siew Hood | Plaintiff | Individual | Judgment for Plaintiff | Won | |
| Leow Chin Bee | Plaintiff | Individual | Judgment for Plaintiff | Won | |
| Wang Yong Hong | Plaintiff | Individual | Judgment for Plaintiff | Won | |
| Foong Kok Seng | Plaintiff | Individual | Judgment for Plaintiff | Won | |
| Leong Wai On | Plaintiff | Individual | |||
| Yew Yeow Tiong | Plaintiff | Individual | |||
| Seng Kong Keong | Plaintiff | Individual |
3. Judges
| Judge Name | Title | Delivered Judgment |
|---|---|---|
| Tai Wei Shyong | Assistant Registrar | Yes |
4. Counsels
| Counsel Name | Organization |
|---|---|
| Melanie Ho | Harry Elias Partnership |
| Daniel Koh | Rajah & Tann |
| Martin Lee | Rajah & Tann |
4. Facts
- The defendant sent an email to 15 colleagues alleging that TJ System was being investigated for bribery.
- The email stated that the CPIB had 'strong' evidence against TJ System.
- The email stated that PTD had internally debarred TJ System from future projects.
- The plaintiffs claimed the email injured their reputations.
- The defendant relied on the defenses of fair comment, qualified privilege, and justification.
- The trial judge found the email defamatory.
- The defendant refused to apologize and persisted in a plea of justification at trial.
5. Formal Citations
- TJ System (S) Pte Ltd and Others v Ngow Kheong Shen (No 2), NA 41/2003, Suit 815/2002, [2003] SGHC 217
6. Timeline
| Date | Event |
|---|---|
| Ting and Leow interviewed by the Corrupt Practices Investigation Bureau | |
| Defendant sent defamatory email | |
| Judgment issued |
7. Legal Issues
- Defamation
- Outcome: The court found that the email was defamatory.
- Category: Substantive
- Assessment of Damages
- Outcome: The court assessed damages based on the nature and gravity of the libel, the conduct of the parties, and relevant precedents.
- Category: Procedural
8. Remedies Sought
- Monetary Damages
9. Cause of Actions
- Defamation
10. Practice Areas
- Civil Litigation
11. Industries
- Security Systems
12. Cited Cases
| Case Name | Court | Affirmed | Citation | Jurisdiction | Significance |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Goh Chok Tong v Jeyaretnam Joshua Benjamin | Court of Appeal | Yes | [1998] 3 SLR 337 | Singapore | Cited for the broad framework of awards in defamation cases and the cautionary note regarding precedent cases. |
| Tang Liang Hong v Lee Kuan Yew & Anor | Unknown | Yes | [1998] 1 SLR 97 | Singapore | Cited regarding the proper assessment of damages in defamation cases and the need for reasonable damages. |
| Yeo Nai Meng v EI-Nets Ltd and Anor | High Court | Yes | [2003] SGHC 110 | Singapore | Cited as a precedent for the range of damages in defamation cases, specifically regarding allegations of fraud and gross misconduct. |
| Arul Chandran v Chew Chin Aik Victor JP | Unknown | Yes | [2001] 1 SLR 505 | Singapore | Cited as a precedent for the range of damages in defamation cases, specifically regarding allegations of being a vicious and dangerous fraud. |
| Sin Heak Hin Pte Ltd & Anor v Yuasa Battery Singapore Co Pte Ltd | Unknown | Yes | [1995] 3 SLR 590 | Singapore | Cited as a precedent for damages awarded to a corporate entity in a defamation case, specifically regarding allegations of selling illegal imitations. |
| Chen Cheng & Anor v Central Christian Church & John Louis | Unknown | Yes | [1999] 1 SLR 94 | Singapore | Cited as a precedent for damages awarded in defamation cases, specifically regarding being labeled as a cult. |
| Cristifori Music Pte Ltd v Robert Piano Co Ltd | Unknown | Yes | [2000] 3 SLR 503 | Singapore | Cited as a precedent for damages awarded in defamation cases, specifically regarding allegations of dishonesty in claiming piano parts were Japanese. |
13. Applicable Rules
| Rule Name |
|---|
| No applicable rules |
14. Applicable Statutes
| Statute Name | Jurisdiction |
|---|---|
| Penal Code Cap 224 | Singapore |
| Prevention of Corruption Act Cap 241 | Singapore |
15. Key Terms and Keywords
15.1 Key Terms
- Defamation
- Libel
- Bribery
- CPIB
- Damages
- Justification
- Qualified Privilege
- Fair Comment
15.2 Keywords
- defamation
- libel
- bribery
- damages
- Singapore
- High Court
17. Areas of Law
| Area Name | Relevance Score |
|---|---|
| Defamation | 95 |
| Fraud and Deceit | 30 |
| Costs | 10 |
16. Subjects
- Defamation
- Tort
- Civil Litigation