1.Compile and Save Evidence : Save all evidence before it is deleted (Screenshot). Sometimes they might delete the status in a few days because they was advised by another party. 

2. Make a police report : Make a police report as a cover report for  take action to civil court. 

3. Take civil action : See a lawyer and get legal advice on whether, your evidence is enough to start an action in court. Usually, we start by sending a Letter of Demand (LOD).

“How do I start an action with a Letter of  Demand?

Usually, the first step in a civil suit is to give a  Letter of Demand to the person who has  defamed you on social media and then claim  the following steps: 

1. Make a public apology; 

2. Delete and/or withdraw the defamatory statement; and 

3. Pay compensation for injury and/or damage to his/her reputation, within the specified period. 

“Elements that need to fulfil for defamation  suit action”

(a) the plaintiff must show that the statement bears defamatory imputations; 

(b) the statement must refer to or reflect upon the plaintiff’s reputation; and 

(c) the statement must have been published to a third person by the defendant. 

“I have received a letter of demand. What I have to do? I’m stuck”

If you have received a Letter of Demand from any law firm, do not ignore the letter and hope that the victim will continue to forget the incident that has taken place without any further action.  

If you ignore the Letter of Demand, the  defamation victim has the right to continue  the case and file a lawsuit in Court without  you being able to state your position and/or explanation or defence. So don’t ignore the letter of demand that you received. 

Case Facts: Ahmad Sabri & Anor v Nur Amirah

On 24 June 2019, the defendant posted several statements on the defendant’s Twitter account in which the statements were allegedly referring to the plaintiffs. The plaintiffs pleaded that five statements were made by the defendant and contended that all five statements have defamatory tendencies (collectively, ‘the impugned postings’). As a result, the plaintiffs had filed this claim against the defendant at High Court Kuala Lumpur.

“JUDGE’S DECISION FOR THIS CASE”

To summarise, this court find that the plaintiffs have proven that the impugned postings are defamatory against them. The defendant has no valid defence in the publication of the impugned postings. Thus, the plaintiffs’ claim is allowed as follows: 

(a) A global sum of RM15,000 is to be paid by the defendant to each of the plaintiffs. (b) A full and unequivocal public apology on terms to be approved by the plaintiffs is to be published on the defendant’s Twitter account and other social networking sites designated by the plaintiffs and accessible to the public. (c) An injunction to restrain the defendant from further publishing the first defamatory statement, the second defamatory statement, the third defamatory statement, the fourth defamatory statement, and the fifth defamatory statement and/or any such defamatory and/or malicious. 

(d) Costs of RM30,000 (subject to allocator) is to be paid by the defendant to the plaintiffs. 

DID YOU RECEIVE A SUMMONS?

Let’s get advise from our professional lawyers. 

Our lawyers have 10 years of experience in  solving complex legal problems for people. 

“Your Lawyer & Rescuer” 

 Contact us at:  https://wa.me/60123640086

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *