Did the Court of Appeal accept that setting aside the subpoena was a trial error?

Question

Accepted Answer

Court of Appeal Dismissed Appeal, Upholding Defamation Ruling and Increasing Damages

The Court of Appeal has dismissed an appeal by Sarawak DAP chief Chong Chieng Jen, affirming a High Court decision that his statements defamed the Sarawak government and the Sarawak Financial Authority (SFA). Consequently, the appellate court increased the damages awarded to the respondents from RM150,000 to RM300,000 and ordered Chong to pay RM150,000 in costs. This ruling stems from allegations Chong made in 2013 concerning RM11 billion in state funds.
Appeal Regarding Subpoena for Former Minister Addressed

During the appeal proceedings, Chong's legal representation sought a retrial, arguing that the trial judge had erred by setting aside a subpoena intended to compel the testimony of the former state finance minister II, Wong Soon Koh. This action, they contended, prevented crucial defence evidence from being presented.
Arguments Against Retrial Presented

Conversely, legal counsel for the Sarawak government and the SFA argued that the original trial had been conducted appropriately. They asserted that ordering a retrial would unfairly prejudice the plaintiffs and cause significant inconvenience to the witnesses involved in the case.
High Court Ruling on Defamation Upheld

The High Court had previously ruled in August 2022 that Chong's claims, which alleged the disappearance of RM11 billion in state funds into a "black hole," were indeed defamatory. The Court of Appeal's decision to dismiss Chong's appeal effectively upholds this finding.

Reading history

Hide →

This history is cleared when the page is closed.

Did the Court of Appeal accept that setting aside the subpoena was a trial error?

Loading

Was this article helpful?

Helpful

Not helpful

Report an issue

1

0

0

Share with friends