PUTRAJAYA, Sept 7 — The Court of Appeal today allowed the applications by Shah Alam Member of Parliament (MP) Khalid Abd Samad and KiniTV Sdn Bhd to get leave to pursue their appeals to seek costs from Pasir Salak MP Datuk Seri Tajuddin Abdul Rahman whose defamation lawsuit was dismissed by the High Court.
In today’s court proceeding, which was conducted online, a three-member bench comprising Court of Appeal judges Datuk Yaacob Md Sam, Datuk S. Nantha Balan and High Court judge Datuk Lim Chong Fong, in a unanimous decision, granted them the leave after ruling that there were merits in their applications.
Khalid’s counsel Datuk Sankara Narayan Nair and KiniTV’s lawyer K. Shanmuga, when contacted by Bernama, confirmed the matter.
According to Sankara, the court allowed the leave after Tajuddin’s lawyer, Muzzammil Merican, who attended the court proceedings, did not object to the applications by Khalid and KiniTV.
Meanwhile, Shanmuga, said following today’s decision, his client, as well as Khalid, would have 14 days to file their notices of appeal.
According to him, NSTP did not file the application for leave to seek costs.
Meanwhile, lawyer Datuk Hasnal Rezua Merican, also representing Tajuddin, when contacted, said his client did not appeal against the High Court’s dismissal of his defamation suit.
On February 22 this year, the High Court dismissed Tajuddin’s suit against Khalid, KiniTV and NSTP without cost.
Tajuddin filed the suit on April 26, 2017, claiming that Khalid had allegedly uttered defamatory statements, as well as used curse words, against him at two media conferences held by Khalid at the Parliament Lobby on November 21 and 21, 2016.
He claimed that Khalid’s first statement was published in NSTP’s newspaper, the New Straits Times, with the title “Fury over Deputy Minister’s Remark” on November 22, 2016, and the second statement by KiniTV on November 24, 2016.
He claimed both the statements were also available on YouTube, which could be accessed by the public.
Tajuddin also claimed that the two statements, among others, meant that he was not fit to be an MP and had acted against the teachings and culture of Islam. In today’s proceedings, lawyer Jaden Phoon Wai Ken appeared for Khalid. — Bernama
