Ministers K Shanmugam & Tan See Leng awarded S$230,000 each in defamation suit against Bloomberg & reporter

Home Affairs Minister K Shanmugam and Manpower Minister Tan See Leng were awarded S$230,000 in damages each for defamation by Bloomberg and its reporter, Low De Wei.

The Singaporean ministers sued the news outlet and the reporter over an article it ran on Dec. 12, 2024, titled, "Singapore Mansion Deals Are Increasingly Shrouded in Secrecy".

The article discussed the sale of Good Class Bungalows (GCBs) in Singapore and claimed there was a lack of public records regarding GCB transactions.

It mentioned private properties purchased by Shanmugam and Tan.

Article found to have defamed the ministers

In a judgment released on Jul. 14, Judge Audrey Lim found that the article had indeed defamed the ministers.

She ruled that it linked the duo's property transactions to secrecy, opacity and money laundering, creating a defamatory impression.

“An allegation that a person has deliberately structured his property dealings to escape examination for possible money laundering plainly tends to lower him in the estimation of right-thinking members of society,” she wrote.

Lim also found that the "natural and ordinary meaning" of the article is that the claimants "took advantage of the absence of checks and balances or disclosure requirements to conduct their property transactions in a non- transparent manner" and that they did so to "hide their transactions and avoid scrutiny that might extend to the possibility of money laundering".

"These are grave assertions that directly impugn the claimants’ personal integrity, character and professional reputation. This is therefore a factor that points towards the award of higher damages," Lim said.

Bloomberg, as the publisher, and Low, as the author, are found to be jointly and severally liable for the defamation, meaning they are jointly responsible for paying the full amount owed.

Purpose was to publish a story about ministers

Justice Lim said that internal correspondence from Bloomberg reveals that the dominant motive behind the article was to publish a story about the ministers, particularly Shanmugam and their GCB transactions.

"The genesis of the Article lay not in a story about trends in the GCB market (as the defendants claim), but in an interest in the claimants," Lim noted.

"The broader narrative of how wealthy individuals in Singapore use non-caveated transactions and trust structures to keep their dealings secret or 'off-radar' was the cover devised to carry that story," said Lim.

Defendants acted with malice

In assessing the amount of damages to be awarded to Shanmugam and Tan, the judge said the defendants had acted with malice.

She said Low knew it was untrue that non-caveated transactions were hidden from the Government, and that the article conveyed a false view that there was a regulatory gap which buyers can exploit.

The judge also found that Bloomberg’s conduct in removing the paywall pertaining to the article also demonstrates malice.

She did not accept that the paywall was removed to comply with the Protection from Online Falsehoods and Manipulation Act (Pofma) direction; rather it was done to make the article accessible to the broader public.

Related