Search results
He further claims that the words were calculated to injure him in his office as leader of a political party and in aspiring to be a Member of Parliament. By this further plea the Plaintiff is in effect invoking section 5 of the Defamation Act (Cap. 32), to which I shall revert later.
- Law of Torts II
JB Jeyaretnam v GOH CHOK TONG. Course. Law of Torts II (LAW...
- Tort I
JB Jeyaretnam v GOH CHOK TONG. University: Universiti...
- Law of Torts II
1997–2001: Defamation suits from Goh Chok Tong and others [ edit ] Following the 1997 general election , Jeyaretnam faced nine defamation suits from 11 Cabinet ministers and Members of Parliament from the PAP for speaking up in support of Workers' Party candidate Tang Liang Hong , who himself also faced 13 defamation suits. [49]
Jb Jeyaretnam v Goh Chok Tong - [1985] 1 Mlj - Free download as PDF File (.pdf), Text File (.txt) or read online for free. The plaintiff, JB Jeyaretnam, attended the inauguration of the Singapore Democratic Party (SDP) and gave a speech that was well-received.
Amnesty International today criticised the recent decision of Singapore’s Court of Appeal to uphold the appeal of Prime Minister Goh Chok Tong against the S$20,000 defamation award made against opposition leader Mr J B Jeyaretnam in July 1997, and to increase the award to S$100.000, plus full costs. “The court’s decision is a further step ...
JB Jeyaretnam v GOH CHOK TONG. Course. Law of Torts II (LAW 1511) 38Documents. Students shared 38 documents in this course. University. International Islamic University Malaysia. Academic year:2021/2022. Uploaded by: Anonymous Student. This document has been uploaded by a student, just like you, who decided to remain anonymous.
JB Jeyaretnam v GOH CHOK TONG. University: Universiti Malaya. Course:Tort I (LIA 1004) 228Documents. Students shared 228 documents in this course. Info More info. Download. Recommended for you. Document continues below. 38.
On 17 July 1998, the Court handed down its judgment, allowing Mr Goh’s appeal and dismissing the appellant’s cross-appeal: see Goh Chok Tong v Jeyaretnam Joshua Benjamin [1998] 3 SLR 337. The Court, among other things, varied the meaning of the defamatory words as determined by Rajendran J.
