KUALA LUMPUR (Oct 15): A company and three of its employees have been awarded RM50,000 each by the High Court as damages after a former colleague was found liable for making a series of defamatory social media posts against them and the company.
High Court judge Roz Mawar Rozain ruled in favour of LE Global Services Sdn Bhd and three others — who are the chief executive officer, the chief operating officer, and a senior manager respectively of the company — against the defendant Lai Zhen Yean, after determining that the statements published online had seriously injured the plaintiffs’ reputations and caused personal distress.
The court found that Lai, who had been employed by the company, had posted several false accusations on social media platforms after Lai’s employment ended. These posts, which named both the company and individual staff members, were described by the court as “reckless, malicious, and devoid of factual basis.”
Judge Roz Mawar said the evidence clearly showed that the defendant’s remarks were motivated by anger and resentment rather than any genuine grievance.
In a detailed 73-paragraph judgment released on Wednesday, the court concluded that the plaintiffs — comprising the company and three of its senior officers — had successfully proven all elements of defamation against the defendant, who had published what the court described as a “systematic attack” on the plaintiffs’ reputation through a series of serious and false allegations.
The court heard that Lai had published the article on the online forum Medium on Aug 20, 2023, describing incidents that had allegedly occurred during Lai’s tenure at the cybersecurity firm. The post was later archived automatically on another online forum, WayBack Machine, and shared widely through yet another online forum Low Yatt Forum, resulting in widespread circulation among industry professionals.
In its findings, the court said that the article’s content, when read as a whole and in context, “clearly and unmistakably referred” to the plaintiffs. This was supported by circumstantial details — including Lai’s LinkedIn profile, employment dates, and references to the company’s internal structure — which allowed third parties to easily identify the plaintiffs.
The court rejected all defences put forward by Lai, and described the case as "fatally contradictory”.
Lai had initially claimed that the statements were true, but later admitted during trial that the article was “fiction” and “fantasy”. The court held that this admission destroyed Lai’s defence of justification and confirmed that the allegations were false.
The defence of fair comment also failed because, according to the court, it requires the comment to be based on facts and made on matters of public interest — neither of which were present in this case. Similarly, the court found that qualified privilege did not apply, as the defendant had “no moral, social, or legal duty” to publish the allegations to the general public.
“The defendant’s actions were motivated by personal grievances arising from workplace incidents rather than any genuine public interest,” the judge said.
While the court found the defendant’s conduct improper, it also noted that Lai’s actions stemmed partly from genuine workplace grievances during Lai’s employment, rather than pure malice. However, Lai’s actions were misguided and legally indefensible.
The court observed that the defendant’s later attempts to have the Low Yatt Forum post removed showed some recognition of the harm caused.
RM200,000 in general damages and public apology ordered
In the judgment dated Oct 9, the court awarded RM50,000 in general damages to each of the four plaintiffs, totalling RM200,000. It declined to award aggravated or exemplary damages, finding that while the publication was serious, the defendant’s conduct did not reach the level of “exceptional malice” that would have warranted punitive compensation.
Instead, the court emphasised that the primary objective was to restore the plaintiffs’ reputations through corrective action rather than heavy monetary awards.
Among the orders granted were:
- A perpetual injunction restraining the defendant from publishing or republishing the article or any similar defamatory statements;
- A removal order requiring Lai to take all necessary steps to delete the article and its archived versions from Medium, WayBack Machine, and any other websites, including Low Yatt Forum;
- A public apology to be published within 21 days of the Oct 9 judgment in two major Malaysian newspapers — one in English and one in Chinese — acknowledging that the allegations were false, defamatory, and unfounded;
- Interest of 5% on the damages from the date of judgment until full payment;
- Legal costs of RM50,000 payable to the plaintiffs.
Lawyers acting for the company and the three others as plaintiffs were Foong Cheng Leong and Rachel Tan Yi Ling, while Lai was represented by Lau Chee Foon and Ooi Xi Fang.