Facebook
Britain's News Portal
Around The Clock
BREAKING
Loading latest headlines…

Bloomberg ordered to pay £266,000 in Singapore defamation case

A Singapore court has ordered Bloomberg and one of its reporters to pay S$460,000 (£266,000) to two ministers in a defamation lawsuit. The case centred on a 2024 article referencing the ministers' luxury property transactions.

  • Bloomberg and reporter Low De Wei ordered to pay S$460,000 (£266,000) to ministers K Shanmugam and Tan See Leng.
  • The defamation suit related to a December 2024 article about luxury property deals in Singapore, which the ministers argued implied wrongdoing.
  • High Court judge Audrey Lim ruled the article's 'natural and ordinary meaning' implied the ministers exploited regulations and sought to avoid scrutiny.
  • Bloomberg expressed disappointment but stated it would respect the ruling, maintaining its reporting was accurate and in the public interest.
  • The article was removed from Bloomberg's website following the court's verdict and had previously received a correction notice under Singapore's POFMA law.

The high-profile defamation lawsuit brought by Singapore's Coordinating Minister for National Security, K Shanmugam, and Minister for Manpower, Tan See Leng, against Bloomberg News has resulted in a significant financial blow to the global news organisation. A High Court judge in Singapore has ordered Bloomberg to pay S$460,000 (approximately £266,000) to the two government ministers following a ruling that the publication's 2024 article implied wrongdoing on their part concerning luxury property transactions.

The controversy centres around an article titled "Singapore Mansion Deals Are Increasingly Shrouded in Secrecy," which explored how some wealthy individuals in Singapore obscured purchases of high-value properties, known as Good Class Bungalows. The article cited the ministers as examples of those who had used methods like shell companies to conduct their transactions. While Bloomberg argued that they were included as "newsworthy examples" within a broader trend and denied implying any misconduct, the court disagreed.

High Court judge Audrey Lim concluded that the article suggested the ministers "took advantage" of existing regulations to conduct their property deals in a "non-transparent manner." The judge further stated that the implication was they did so "to avoid scrutiny that might extend to the possibility of money laundering," deeming these "grave assertions that directly impugn the claimants' personal integrity, character, and professional reputation."

The article had reported on Minister Shanmugam's sale of a bungalow for S$88 million using a trust and Minister Tan's purchase of a Good Class Bungalow for around S$27 million through a non-caveated deal. The ministers argued that their inclusion unfairly linked their legitimate property dealings to the article's broader themes of secrecy and potential money laundering.

Bloomberg's editor-in-chief, John Micklethwait, expressed disappointment with the ruling but stated that the organisation would respect it. He reiterated Bloomberg's position that its reporting was accurate and served an important public interest, asserting that the ministers had placed an "extremely strained meaning" on the story. The contested article has since been removed from Bloomberg's website as per the court's order.

Separately, Singaporean authorities had previously mandated a "correction notice" on the article under its Protection from Online Falsehoods and Manipulation Act (POFMA), introduced in 2019 to combat misinformation. Critics argue that this law is sometimes used against government criticism.

Why this matters: This case highlights the significant legal risks faced by international media organisations operating within different jurisdictions, particularly concerning defamation laws. It underscores the ongoing debate around press freedom and governmental oversight in countries like Singapore.

What this means for you: What this means for you: This case reflects the differing legal standards for defamation and press freedom across the world. For UK citizens, it's a reminder of the challenges global news organisations face in reporting on international affairs and the potential impact on the availability and content of news from certain regions.

Related Articles

Get the news that matters.

Join thousands of readers getting the best of British news straight to their inbox.