Singapore court orders Bloomberg to pay ministers in defamation case
A Singapore court ordered Bloomberg and a reporter to pay damages to ministers K Shanmugam and Tan See Leng over a property deals report. The ruling said the article linked their transactions to secrecy and money laundering claims, underscoring Singapore's strict defamation threshold.
A Singapore High Court on Tuesday ordered Bloomberg and one of its reporters to pay SGD 230,000 in damages to two cabinet ministers in a defamation case, according to local media reports.
The lawsuit was filed last year by ministers K Shanmugam and Tan See Leng over a 2024 article on property deals. The court held that the article, read as a whole, linked their transactions to allegations of secrecy, opacity and money laundering, and therefore carried a defamatory meaning.
The Bloomberg article was titled "Singapore mansion deals are increasingly shrouded in secrecy" and referred to transactions involving Good Class Bungalows in Singapore. It mentioned Shanmugam's 2023 sale of his former house in the Queen Astrid Park area to UBS Trustees for SGD 88 million and Tan's non-caveated purchase of a bungalow in Brizay Park for nearly SGD 27.3 million.
A non-caveated transaction in Singapore's property market is one in which the buyer does not lodge a formal legal notice, or caveat, with the Singapore Land Authority to publicly record their interest in the property. The process is generally used to avoid delays and administrative procedures.
Justice Lim rejected Bloomberg's argument that the report was only about a wider pattern of non-caveated GCB transactions and that the ministers were cited merely as examples, The Straits Times reported. In a 71-page judgment, she said the test for deciding the natural and ordinary meaning of disputed words in a defamation case is well-settled.
According to Channel News Asia, courts in defamation cases decide meaning based on the common sense and general knowledge of ordinary readers. The intention of the publisher and the understanding of the claimants are not relevant to the final legal outcome.
The judge also rejected Bloomberg's reliance on the Reynolds Defence, a public interest defence in UK law, saying it is not part of Singapore law. The defence comes from the UK case Reynolds vs Times Newspapers and protects journalists in some defamation cases if the report is on a matter of public interest and is judged to be responsible and fair.
Justice Lim said, "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." She also said the article, taken as a whole, linked the ministers' deals with claims about secrecy, opacity and money laundering.
The article had referred to a SGD 3 billion money laundering case and said criminals of Chinese origin linked to it had been convicted, jailed and deported, before naming Tan and Shanmugam and their GCB transactions, according to the CNA report. Bloomberg and reporter Low De Wei denied the claims, saying the story was about broader trends in Singapore's GCB market and not about the ministers personally or any wrongdoing by them.
The ruling means Bloomberg and Low De Wei must pay damages to Shanmugam and Tan See Leng after the court found that the article's overall presentation defamed the two ministers in the context of reporting on property transactions and secrecy.
With PTI Inputs
A Singapore High Court on Tuesday ordered Bloomberg and one of its reporters to pay SGD 230,000 in damages to two cabinet ministers in a defamation case, according to local media reports.
The lawsuit was filed last year by ministers K Shanmugam and Tan See Leng over a 2024 article on property deals. The court held that the article, read as a whole, linked their transactions to allegations of secrecy, opacity and money laundering, and therefore carried a defamatory meaning.
The Bloomberg article was titled "Singapore mansion deals are increasingly shrouded in secrecy" and referred to transactions involving Good Class Bungalows in Singapore. It mentioned Shanmugam's 2023 sale of his former house in the Queen Astrid Park area to UBS Trustees for SGD 88 million and Tan's non-caveated purchase of a bungalow in Brizay Park for nearly SGD 27.3 million.
A non-caveated transaction in Singapore's property market is one in which the buyer does not lodge a formal legal notice, or caveat, with the Singapore Land Authority to publicly record their interest in the property. The process is generally used to avoid delays and administrative procedures.
Justice Lim rejected Bloomberg's argument that the report was only about a wider pattern of non-caveated GCB transactions and that the ministers were cited merely as examples, The Straits Times reported. In a 71-page judgment, she said the test for deciding the natural and ordinary meaning of disputed words in a defamation case is well-settled.
According to Channel News Asia, courts in defamation cases decide meaning based on the common sense and general knowledge of ordinary readers. The intention of the publisher and the understanding of the claimants are not relevant to the final legal outcome.
The judge also rejected Bloomberg's reliance on the Reynolds Defence, a public interest defence in UK law, saying it is not part of Singapore law. The defence comes from the UK case Reynolds vs Times Newspapers and protects journalists in some defamation cases if the report is on a matter of public interest and is judged to be responsible and fair.
Justice Lim said, "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." She also said the article, taken as a whole, linked the ministers' deals with claims about secrecy, opacity and money laundering.
The article had referred to a SGD 3 billion money laundering case and said criminals of Chinese origin linked to it had been convicted, jailed and deported, before naming Tan and Shanmugam and their GCB transactions, according to the CNA report. Bloomberg and reporter Low De Wei denied the claims, saying the story was about broader trends in Singapore's GCB market and not about the ministers personally or any wrongdoing by them.
The ruling means Bloomberg and Low De Wei must pay damages to Shanmugam and Tan See Leng after the court found that the article's overall presentation defamed the two ministers in the context of reporting on property transactions and secrecy.
With PTI Inputs
