Lynas Corp plans to sue three more for defamation
Lee Long HuiPublished: May 2, 2012 8:48 AM | Updated: May 2, 2012 8:51 AM
Australian mining firm Lynas Corporation Ltd is planning to sue three more parties for defamation, in addition to the current suit against Kuantan-based anti-Lynas organisation Save Malaysia Stop Lynas committee (SMSL) and online news portal Free Malaysia Today ( FMT ).
Australian mining firm Lynas Corporation Ltd is planning to sue three more parties for defamation, in addition to the current suit against Kuantan-based anti-Lynas organisation Save Malaysia Stop Lynas committee (SMSL) and online news portal Free Malaysia Today (FMT).
SMSL committee lawyer Bastian Vendargon told reporters today that the identities of the three parties will be revealed on May 9 during the case management of the inter-parte injunction application by Lynas.
According to him, lawyers acting on behalf of the Australian firm refused to reveal the identities of the additional three parties before Kuala Lumpur High Court Judge John Louis O’Hara today.
The company had filed two defamation suits against the SMSL committee members and FMT last month.
The legal proceedings follow alleged false and misleading statements made in a joint statement published on SMSL’s blog and an article published by FMT.
Lynas today had applied to the court for an ex-parte gag order injunction against SMSL to stop the committee from issuing any defamatory statement against the company.
In the suit, Lynas named SMSL, committee chairperson Tan Bun Teet and an active member, Lim Sow Teow, as defendants.
However, O’Hara dismissed the application and fixed May 9 for the case management of the inter-parte injunction application.
“After the hearing on May 9, we will know the date for the inter-parte injunction hearing. That means the injunction will be contested, and both parties will be heard before any order is made,” said Bastian.
It is understood that neither the SMSL committee nor FMT have seen the statement of claim by Lynas.
According to the endorsement of claim obtained by the reporters, Lynas is seeking RM30 million in compensation, interest, costs and other relief deemed appropriate by the court and an injunction to prevent all the defendants from continuing to issue or publish the allegedly defamatory statements.
However, it did not state the breakdown of the claim for both parties.
SMSL committee lawyer Bastian Vendargon told reporters today that the identities of the three parties will be revealed on May 9 during the case management of the inter-parte injunction application by Lynas.
According to him, lawyers acting on behalf of the Australian firm refused to reveal the identities of the additional three parties before Kuala Lumpur High Court Judge John Louis O’Hara today.
The company had filed two defamation suits against the SMSL committee members and FMT last month.
The legal proceedings follow alleged false and misleading statements made in a joint statement published on SMSL’s blog and an article published by FMT.
Lynas today had applied to the court for an ex-parte gag order injunction against SMSL to stop the committee from issuing any defamatory statement against the company.
In the suit, Lynas named SMSL, committee chairperson Tan Bun Teet and an active member, Lim Sow Teow, as defendants.
However, O’Hara dismissed the application and fixed May 9 for the case management of the inter-parte injunction application.
“After the hearing on May 9, we will know the date for the inter-parte injunction hearing. That means the injunction will be contested, and both parties will be heard before any order is made,” said Bastian.
It is understood that neither the SMSL committee nor FMT have seen the statement of claim by Lynas.
According to the endorsement of claim obtained by the reporters, Lynas is seeking RM30 million in compensation, interest, costs and other relief deemed appropriate by the court and an injunction to prevent all the defendants from continuing to issue or publish the allegedly defamatory statements.
However, it did not state the breakdown of the claim for both parties.
View Comments0

