Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong's libel suit against blogger Leong Sze Hian will proceed to trial.

Counterclaim thrown out

A High Court judge has thrown out the counterclaim by Leong against PM Lee.

Lim Tean, Leong’s lawyer, had filed a counterclaim alleging that PM Lee’s original libel suit was an abuse of court.

Mounting costs for defendant

As a result of throwing out the counterclaim, Justice Aedit Abdullah ruled for costs to be awarded to PM Lee.

This is for both Leong’s application to strike out the defamation claim and PM Lee’s application to strike out Leong’s counterclaim.

What judge ruled

Justice Aedit Abdullah said in a written judgment that Leong’s counterclaim “discloses no recognised cause of action, let alone a reasonable one”.

It was issued on Tuesday, March 12.

The court was emphatic “that the tort of abuse of process is not recognised in Singapore law”, Justice Aedit Abdullah wrote, as he cited a previous decision by the Court of Appeal.

What were the judge's words?

The judge wrote: “A ‘reasonable cause of action’ is one that has ‘some chance of success when only the allegations in the pleading are considered’."

“A claim based on a cause of action that is not recognised at law will be struck out for disclosing no reasonable cause of action", the judge reasoned.

“Accordingly, as the defendant’s counterclaim discloses no recognised cause of action [in the law], let alone a reasonable one, it should be struck out.”

Based on previous Court of Appeal decision

The previous decision by the Court of Appeal cited was for Lee Tat Development Pte Ltd v Management Corporation Strata Title Plan No 301 [2018] 2 SLR 866:

… [W]e do not recognise the tort of abuse of process in Singapore … there are ample legal mechanisms within the existing rules of civil procedure that afford innocent parties adequate legal remedies in the event that there is indeed an abuse of process by the party concerned on the other side. For this reason alone, it is clear that the appeal on this particular issue must fail simply because … [the appellant’s] claim cannot even take off since the legal basis upon which it premises that claim does not exist. [emphasis in original]

Tort of abuse of process not recognised

Justice Aedit Abdullah also said he did not see anything in the Court of Appeal’s judgment “which leaves room for the tort of abuse of process to be recognised as a possible control to counter the misuse of public functions or powers”.

Why the case will go to trial

The judge said PM Lee’s original defamation suit “involves triable issues”.

He also said: “The plaintiff has a substantial reputation as the Prime Minister of Singapore.”

This was so as “the use of the offending words would be material” and such context can only be ascertained at trial, the judge said.

It is not conducive for the court to rule "on the question of meaning" at this stage.

What judge said about PM Lee's counterclaims

Justice Aedit Abdullah acknowledged the line of cases cited by PM Lee.

These sought to establish that allegations of corruption and criminal conduct are “very grave charges”.

When made against the Prime Minister of a country, they are especially grave as they constitute as an “attack on the very core of [his] political credo” and erode his “moral authority”.

Leong’s argument that subsequent government statements debunking the Facebook post and article ensured that no damage was caused to the plaintiff’s reputation, as this “did not mean that the statements complained of lost their defamatory effect thereafter”, the judge said.

Background of case

PM Lee sued Leong in November 2018 for defamation.

Leong had shared on Facebook an article alleging that PM Lee had helped former Malaysian prime minister Najib Razak launder money in relation to scandal-hit Malaysian state fund 1Malaysia Development Berhad (1MDB).