JUDGMENT

Ong Chee Kwan JCA:

Introduction

[1] This is an appeal against the decision of the High Court Judge who allowed the Respondent's claim in a defamation suit arising from seven impugned statements published by the three Appellants over a compressed period of eight days. The learned High Court Judge found that each of the impugned statements bore defamatory meanings of and concerning the Respondent, rejected the Appellants' pleaded defences of justification, qualified privilege and fair comment, and proceeded to award general damages together with aggravated damages against each of the Appellants in respect of each of their respective publications. The Appellants were further ordered to publish an apology to the Respondent.

[2] The Appellants appealed against that decision. Significantly, while the finding that the impugned statements are defamatory was not seriously pursued before us, the Appellants contended that the learned High Court Judge erred in rejecting the defences advanced and in the approach taken to the assessment of damages. In particular, it was submitted that the seven statements, having been made within a short span of time and concerning the same subject matter, ought properly to have been treated as constituting a single continuous course of defamation, rather than as discrete and independent publications attracting separate awards.

[3] Arising from that submission is the further question whether, assuming liability is established, it would be more appropriate to substitute the multiple awards made below with a single global sum of damages, and whether such damages ought to be imposed jointly and severally against all three Appellants, rather than severally against each Appellant for each statement.

[4] This appeal also raises an important issue of principle as to whether the Court possesses the jurisdiction to compel the publication of an apology, a matter on which the learned High Court Judge below ruled in the affirmative.