Aafiyat Marketing Sdn. Bhd. v MUHD SHAKIR AS-SALAM BIN YA

ka-22ncvc-44-10-2023 High Court (Mahkamah Tinggi) 21 December 2025 • KA-22NCvC-44-10/2023 • 44 min read
22 cases cited (0 SG, 22 foreign)

Catchwords

TORT: Defamation — Libel — Defamatory publications on Facebook by a commercial competitor — Words imputing corporate plaintiff as "scammer", committing "jenayah penipuan" (criminal fraud), and selling "lampante" (unfit for human consumption) oil — Whether words defamatory in their natural and ordinary meaning — Borderless nature of social media platform deliberately configured to 'public' — Whether corporate entity can maintain an action in defamation without proof of actual special damage or financial loss. TORT: Defamation — Defences — Justification — Section 8 of the Defamation Act 1957 — Whether defendant proved the substantial truth of the 'core sting' of the libel — Defendant possessing independent scientific report (Chemiservice Test Report) proving plaintiff's product efficacy but deliberately suppressing it — Whether defendant's demand for plaintiff to prove product efficacy amounts to an unlawful shift of the evidentiary burden of proof. TORT: Defamation — Defences — Fair Comment — Whether words published were statements of fact or mere expressions of opinion — Whether explicit accusations of criminal fraud and being a "scammer" could be shielded as 'public education' or rhetorical inquiry — Whether defence of fair comment defeated by express malice. TORT: Defamation — Defences — Qualified Privilege — Reynolds privilege of responsible journalism — Defendant failing to verify facts or contact the plaintiff to obtain their side of the story prior to publication — Whether defence of responsible journalism available to a direct commercial competitor engaged in sabotage. TORT: Defamation — Express Malice — Dominant motive of the publisher — Whether defendant acted with an ulterior commercial motive — Defendant weaponising the guise of 'consumer protection' to assassinate trading reputation of a direct rival — Defendant actively promoting his own competing brand in the comment sections of the impugned posts — Reckless disregard for the truth. TORT: Defamation — Damages — Corporate Plaintiff — Assessment of General, Aggravated, and Exemplary damages — Corporate entity precluded from claiming aggravated damages as it "has no feelings to hurt" — Award of Exemplary damages — Rookes v Barnard second category applied — Defendant's conduct calculated to make a profit exceeding the compensation payable to the plaintiff — Defamatory publication leveraged as a targeted marketing springboard to divert customers for financial gain.

Judges (1)

John Lee Kien How @ Mohammad Johan Lee Delivered

Counsel (5)

Azira, Zainah Zainal & Associates Firm Laili & Co Firm Ang Khoon Cheong Counsel Plaintiff Noorlaili Aziz Counsel Plaintiff Yusma Norazreeny Mohd Yusof Counsel Defendant

Parties (2)

Aafiyat Marketing Sdn Bhd Plaintiff Muhd Shakir As-salam bin Ya Defendant

Statutes Cited

Evidence Act 1950 (Cap 56)

Cases Cited (22)

UK (7)
[1917] AC 309 [1940] 1 All ER 1 [1964] AC 1129 [1975] AC 135 [2007] 1 AC 359 [2008] EWHC 1781 [2017] EWHC 433
MY (15)
[1979] 2 MLJ 185 [1982] 1 MLJ 239 [1986] 2 MLJ 154 [1989] 3 MLRH 120 [1996] 1 MLRH 548 [1999] 1 MLJ 371 [2008] 8 CLJ 418 [2010] MLRH 723 [2012] 1 MLRH 519 [2012] 3 MLRH 124 [2014] 4 MLJ 242 [2014] 6 MLRH 486 [2016] 1 CLJ 512 [2018] 4 MLJ 209 [2021] 7 CLJ 145

Judgment

Read the full judgment on the official Malaysia Courts portal.

Read on eJudgment

Source: eJudgment (ka-22ncvc-44-10-2023)