Premier Security v Herman: Defamation Claim over Security Services

In Premier Security Co-operative Ltd and Others v Basil Anthony Herman, the High Court of Singapore heard a defamation claim by Premier Security Co-operative Limited, its managing director Saraj Din s/o Sher Mohamed, and its Manager Leow Cher Kheng against Basil Anthony Herman, a former security executive of Premier, based on statements in the defendant's letters to various parties. The court, presided over by Lai Siu Chiu J, found in favor of the plaintiffs, awarding damages and granting an injunction against the defendant. The defendant's defenses of justification, fair comment, and qualified privilege were rejected, and his counterclaim was dismissed.

1. Case Overview

1.1 Court

High Court

1.2 Outcome

Judgment for Plaintiffs

1.3 Case Type

Tort

1.4 Judgment Type

Grounds of Decision

1.5 Jurisdiction

Singapore

1.6 Description

Defamation claim by Premier Security against Herman over letters alleging poor security services. The court ruled in favor of Premier, awarding damages.

1.7 Decision Date

2. Parties and Outcomes

Party NameRoleTypeOutcomeOutcome TypeCounsels
Basil Anthony HermanDefendantIndividualClaim DismissedLost
Premier Security Co-Operative LtdPlaintiffCorporationJudgment for PlaintiffWon
Saraj Din s/o Sher MohamedPlaintiffIndividualJudgment for PlaintiffWon
Leow Cher KhengPlaintiffIndividualJudgment for PlaintiffWon

3. Judges

Judge NameTitleDelivered Judgment
Lai Siu ChiuJudgeYes

4. Counsels

Counsel NameOrganization
Singa RetnamKertar & Co
Patrick Chin Meng LiongChin Patrick & Co
Adrian Wong Soon PengRajah & Tann LLP
Ho Hua ChyiRajah & Tann LLP

4. Facts

  1. The defendant, a former security executive of Premier, sent letters to various parties alleging poor security services by Premier.
  2. The plaintiffs claimed the defendant's letters were defamatory, false, and malicious.
  3. The defendant pleaded justification, fair comment, and qualified privilege as defenses.
  4. The court found the defendant's statements to be defamatory and that he was actuated by malice.
  5. The defendant's witnesses, former employees of Premier, were found to be biased and untruthful.
  6. The defendant was dismissed from Premier for poor work performance.
  7. The defendant wrote multiple letters to various parties after his dismissal, despite being asked to cease.

5. Formal Citations

  1. Premier Security Co-operative Ltd and Others v Basil Anthony Herman, Suit 195/2007, [2009] SGHC 214

6. Timeline

DateEvent
Premier Security Co-operative Limited registered.
Defendant employed by Premier Security.
Defendant confirmed as permanent employee.
Premier received anonymous letter regarding the defendant.
Defendant's services terminated.
Defendant's last day of service.
Defendant sent letter to Minister of Manpower.
Defendant sent letter to Commissioner of Police.
SIRD replied to the defendant's complaints.
Defendant sent letter to Deputy Prime Minister Wong Kan Seng.
Premier replied to MOM regarding the defendant's dismissal.
Defendant sent letter to Director of SIRD and the police force.
Plaintiffs' solicitors demanded the defendant cease defamatory statements.
Defendant sent letter to SIRD.
Defendant sent letter to Internal Security Department.
Commencement of suit.
Defendant sent letter to SIRD.
Defendant wrote to Premier's chairman.
Order of court finding the defendant's statements defamatory.
Cross-examination of the defendant began.
Cross-examination of the defendant continued.
Cross-examination of the defendant continued.
Cross-examination of the defendant ended.
Judgment reserved.
Clarification on the issue of costs awarded.

7. Legal Issues

  1. Defamation
    • Outcome: The court found that the defendant's statements were defamatory and that he had failed to prove his defenses of justification, fair comment, and qualified privilege. The court also found that the defendant was actuated by malice.
    • Category: Substantive
    • Sub-Issues:
      • Justification
      • Fair comment
      • Qualified privilege
      • Malice
    • Related Cases:
      • [2009] 1 SLR 177
      • [2001] 1 SLR 505
  2. Wrongful Dismissal
    • Outcome: The court found that the defendant was not wrongfully dismissed.
    • Category: Substantive
  3. Costs
    • Outcome: The court awarded costs to the plaintiffs on the High Court scale.
    • Category: Procedural
    • Related Cases:
      • [2004] 3 SLR 193

8. Remedies Sought

  1. Damages
  2. Injunction

9. Cause of Actions

  • Defamation

10. Practice Areas

  • Litigation

11. Industries

  • Security

12. Cited Cases

Case NameCourtAffirmedCitationJurisdictionSignificance
Lee Hsien Loong v Review Publishing Co Ltd and Another and Another SuitN/AYes[2009] 1 SLR 177SingaporeCited regarding the defence of fair comment.
Arul Chandran v Chew Chin Aik Victor JPN/AYes[2001] 1 SLR 505SingaporeCited as a parallel case regarding malice in defamation.
Arul Chandran v Chew Chin Aik Victor JPHigh CourtYes[2000] SGHC 111SingaporeCited regarding the trial judge's findings on malice.
Cheong Ghim Fah v Murugian s/o Rangasamy (No 2)N/AYes[2004] 3 SLR 193SingaporeCited regarding the issue of costs in the High Court.
John Lee & Anor v Henry Wong Jan FookN/AYes[1981] 1 MLJ 108N/ACited regarding qualified privilege.
Hytech Builders Pte Ltd v Goh Teng Poh KarenN/AYes[2008] 3 SLR 236SingaporeCited by the defendant but found not relevant.
Lim Eng Hock Peter v Lin Jian Wei & AnotherN/AYes[2009] 2 SLR 1004SingaporeCited by the defendant but found not relevant.
Cookson v HarewoodN/AYes[1932] 2 KB 478N/ACited regarding the repetition of rumours in defamation cases.
Lewis v Daily TelegraphN/AYes[1964] AC 234N/ACited regarding the repetition of rumours in defamation cases.
Tara Rajaratnam v Datuk Jagindar Singh & OrsHigh CourtYes[1983] 2 MLJ 127MalaysiaCited regarding the judgment of the Johore High Court.

13. Applicable Rules

Rule Name
O59 r 27(5) of the Rules of Court

14. Applicable Statutes

Statute NameJurisdiction
The Defamation Act (Cap 75, 1985 Rev Ed)Singapore
Subordinate Courts Act (Cap 321, 2007 Rev Ed)Singapore

15. Key Terms and Keywords

15.1 Key Terms

  • Defamation
  • Justification
  • Fair comment
  • Qualified privilege
  • Malice
  • Security services
  • Wrongful dismissal
  • Liquidated damages
  • Orientation course
  • Security executive

15.2 Keywords

  • defamation
  • security services
  • wrongful dismissal
  • Singapore
  • High Court

17. Areas of Law

Area NameRelevance Score
Defamation90
Employment Law50
Administrative Law30
Cooperative Law20

16. Subjects

  • Defamation
  • Tort Law
  • Employment Law