357
edits
SGPolitico (talk | contribs) No edit summary |
SGPolitico (talk | contribs) |
||
Line 172: | Line 172: | ||
== Defamation suit against Lee Hsien Yang over Ridout Road == | == Defamation suit against Lee Hsien Yang over Ridout Road == | ||
{{Main|Defamation suit by K Shanmugam and Vivian Balakrishnan against Lee Hsien Yang}} | {{Main|Defamation suit by K Shanmugam and Vivian Balakrishnan against Lee Hsien Yang}} | ||
Ministers K Shanmugam and Vivian Balakrishnan accused Lee Hsien Yang | Ministers K Shanmugam and Vivian Balakrishnan accused Lee Hsien Yang of making defamatory statements in a Facebook post in July 2022 regarding their rental of Ridout Road properties. | ||
They alleged that | They alleged that Lee Hsien Yang’s post suggested they received preferential treatment from the Singapore Land Authority (SLA) and implied corrupt practices. | ||
When | When Lee Hsien Yang refused to retract his statements, apologise, or make a donation to charity as demanded by the ministers, they filed a defamation suit against him. Lee Hsien Yang declined to enter an appearance or defend the suit, leading to a default judgment in November 2022. | ||
Justice Goh Yihan later ruled that the statements were false and defamatory, targeting the ministers’ integrity, professional reputation, and honour. The court found that | Justice Goh Yihan later ruled that the statements were false and defamatory, targeting the ministers’ integrity, professional reputation, and honour. The court found that Lee Hsien Yang acted with malice, displaying a reckless disregard for the truth. | ||
On 2 May 2023, the court awarded S$400,000 in damages—S$200,000 to each minister, including S$50,000 in aggravated damages due to malice. The court also issued injunctions preventing | On 2 May 2023, the court awarded S$400,000 in damages—S$200,000 to each minister, including S$50,000 in aggravated damages due to malice. The court also issued injunctions preventing Lee Hsien Yang from repeating the defamatory statements. | ||
Justice Goh highlighted the severity of the allegations, the prominence of the claimants, and the defendant’s conduct as factors justifying the substantial damages. Additionally, the ministers sought costs and disbursements exceeding S$219,000 from | Justice Goh highlighted the severity of the allegations, the prominence of the claimants, and the defendant’s conduct as factors justifying the substantial damages. Additionally, the ministers sought costs and disbursements exceeding S$219,000 from Lee Hsien Yang, who resides in the UK. | ||
In September 2024, | In September 2024, Lee Hsien Yang paid S$619,335.53<ref>https://www.theonlinecitizen.com/2024/09/29/lee-hsien-yang-pays-s619335-to-ministers-shanmugam-and-balakrishnan-in-defamation-suit-to-protect-family-home/</ref> to the ministers after losing the defamation suit. He stated that making the payment was necessary to protect his family home at 38 Oxley Road. | ||
Despite the judgment, | Despite the judgment, Lee Hsien Yang continues to deny wrongdoing and maintains his criticism of the ministers’ actions. |