ANALYSIS. What does it mean when The NSTP & the Gang of Four had to amend their Statement of Claims barely one month after they had sued Rocky for defamation?
One: Their lawyers at Shearn Delamore had cocked up in the original claims, and Rocky’s lawyers had called a spade a spade by telling the High Court that their claims were FATALLY DEFICIENT.
Two: The NSTP & the Gang of Four had to resort to avoidance of Rocky’s strike-out application as a desperate line of defence. The amendment of claims is self-admission of the frailty of their case, and Shearn Delamore is not confident of passing the first entrapment it had ambushed unto itself — the fishing expedition.
Should the suit get struck out based on technical ground allowed by the law, collateral damage for Shearn Delamore will be huge.
Why? Because this archaic legal firm will have to increase the insurance premium as not many insurance companies are there to undertake PI (public liability and professional indemnity) policy related to Shearn Delamore which has accumulated over 25 major lost cases in the last three years alone!
So, what will happen next?
Everybody who drink in lawyers’ pubs knows it. Shearn Delamore will play dirty.
This is evident in the bad manner the amended Statement of Claims was served on Rocky’s lawyers, Chooi & Co.
(CLICK HERE to download the amended Statement of Claims against Rocky; and CLICK HERE to compare with the original claims.)
For the record, Rocky applied on January 25 to have the defamation suit struck out on the basis that the claims by the plaintiffs were ‘fatally deficient‘.
This was reiterated on February 22 by Edmund Bon, Rocky’s lawyer, who said: “We had applied to have the suit struck out on the ground that the plaintiffs had not pleaded their defamation suit as clearly as they ought to under the law.”
Go to YouTube to hear Bon’s statement for yourself.
For the three solid weeks from January 26 to February 15, Shearn Delamore had to grind hard to come up with an amended Statement of Claims to respond to Rocky’s strike out application.
Last Friday (February 16), a day ahead of the Lunar New Year holidays, Shearn Delamore finally served three volumes of the amended documents on Rocky’s solicitors, Chooi & Co.
That’s not the last of Shearn Delamore’s shoddy slip-shot. The fourth volume of documents, the Plaintiffs’ Reply to Affidavits, was only served on Chooi & Co. around 11.00am on February 22, which was exactly three-and-a-half hours before the hearing of Rocky’s strike out application was scheduled to begin at 2.30pm.
Go to Bernama to read Shearn Delamore’s slip-shot for yourself. Bernama has vividly recorded the bad service so unworthy of Shearn Delamore’s history-old stature in legal practice enshrined by its founders.
What option does Rocky have for now?
First, Rocky had to instruct his lawyers to look into the amended claim carefully and closely before he makes decision on the next course of action.
This is where the devils of Shearn Delamore and Kalimullah Masheerul Hassan, the dominant plaintiff, lie.
They want to impress the Court that it was Rocky and his lawyers who caused the delay.
But High Court Judge Hishamuddin Yunus was convinced that Rocky should be given ample to prepare his case since Shearn Delamore has taken its own sweet time to serve the papers, the amended papers to salvage the original claims that it had de facto admitted as “fatally deficient”. The Judge agreed to adjourn the hearing to April 2.
Meanwhile, Rocky may decide his next course of action out of two possible options.
ONE: Continue with the application to have the suit struck out.
TWO: Withdraw the strike out application and proceed to the hearing proper in an open court.
Nevertheless, as in normal legal manoeuvre, Rocky can also have the benefit of convincing himself if it satisfies his very purposes and proceed with one or the other option.
April 2 will be a new high point for us to know Rocky’s strategy.
Rocky fully understands that he is facing The NSTP and the Gang of Four (deputy chairperson Kalimullah Masheerul Hassan, chief executive officer Syed Faisal Albar, group editor-in-chief Hishamudin Aun and former group editor Brendan Pereira), who had also applied for an inter-parte injunction to require him to remove 48 articles from his weblog.
He also knows full well that The NSTP and Gang of Four had schemed to restrain him from further publishing articles blowing their covers by invoking the Defamation Act.
It’s YOU, our fellow Malaysian compatriots, to decide whether we should allow these cowards to get away with murder.
We will share with you, soon, how we should act together in an effective manner.
For now, you should know that Shearn Delamore and Kalimullah are now cracking. They have cocked up big time on the statement of claims to move their case forward.
We should fight to win on this.
February 23, 2007 at 11:43 pm
A war of attrition, to see how wears out earlier. Stay in there.
February 24, 2007 at 1:37 am
All you guys seem to sound so clever and influential. You should know who NSTP’s biggest advertisers are. Maybe you should tell them if they don’t stop advertising in NSTP, you would stop representing them. After all if NSTP represents the worst of humanity, those who sponsor and support them should be just as inhumane. And those of you who work for these sponsors are just no different anyway. And mind you its no crime not to advertise or to stop advertising in NSTP and it is no crime to stop working for or representing those who sponsor or support NSTP either.
February 24, 2007 at 2:02 am
Maybe this will drag on and on and on… maybe with no closure. No prob for the Gang of Four, what with injunction in hand.
They can make it happen u know. The Kerpan land grab case is ongoing AFAIK. Many of the plaintiffs are dead, the case was filed during the late 80s. So is the Terengganu petroleum royalty case.
Deja vu?
February 24, 2007 at 2:47 am
Aaah, savouring the sweet victory, that’s how I see the outcome. They know that Rocky can smell their blood, the only way out is back paddle out of shit creek, furiously and desperately. I hope and pray that those guys lose their paddle on the way.
February 24, 2007 at 5:40 am
I’m not sure whether this is relevant at this stage of the proceedings.
BP has resigned from NST and although he is implicated with some of the issues, is BPs presence as one of the plaintiffs, on his own accord?
Let’s put it another way. BP quit on 1/12/06.
The NST suit was served on 18/01/07. NST may use the issues related to BP as it own the rights for the published articles written by him. How does one apply intellectual property rights in this case? What’s the locus standi and legal ramifications?
Meanwhile, the submission of the amended statement of claims, or rather the timing, sucks bigtime. So, who’s fumbling? The plaintiffs or Shearn Delamore or both?
February 24, 2007 at 6:26 am
I think this case has gone beyond its limit. Too much of this proceeding will make everyone feels bored.
Stop it and let the court decides.
February 24, 2007 at 11:39 am
Hope what is written here is not true because my sister is a lawyer and she works for shearn Delamore. I was told it is a very big and reputable law firm in Malaysia by my sister. Anyway I support u rocky and hope u win and continue highlighting the misdeed of the power that be in Malaysia. By the way, I used to be like malay mail until they change it to so called attact young reader. Now I don’t buy malay mail no more. and I stop buying nstp too. I read the star newspaper and read internet blog though I rather prefer if blogger put their name on their blog.
February 24, 2007 at 7:10 pm
shar101,
some shareholders of nst may be bringing that subject up at the next agm in july.
maybe even earlier, if they can get a egm to be held to discuss this action against bloggers.
i am not a shareholder but an old friend is. he said, “who the fuck gave them directors the right to initiate the lawsuit?” his argument is that because of the nature of this suit, which is
1/ unprecendented
2/ involved a former group editor
3/ involved a former editor
4/ affects freedom of expression,
the shareholders’ views should have been sought.
we must remember that the suit is not between the four against the blogger, but is between NSTP+the four and the blogger.
sekian.
February 25, 2007 at 4:08 am
[...] let you be the judge, we have obtained the documents from sources within Shearn Delamore, and published here, in four parts, to help you get a good grasp of the merits of the case. As we [...]
February 25, 2007 at 6:56 pm
Brendan Pereira. You are no more in the employ of NST. Bet you, if NST is not footing your legal fees, you would withdraw. Can NST use corporate money for an ex-employee. They call it fringe-benefits or donating to the less fortunate? I am bewildered, perplexed or whatever shit it is…..its a big load of shit.
February 26, 2007 at 2:05 am
Ok Lets summarize,
While we wait for the courts to decide, the only battle that we can fight is the one with NST and the 4.
2 things we can do now.
1. Like Warren says, we need to find out the big corporates who pour big bucks in NST
2. Get the message across to all the shareholders of NST of the point raised by lubukmelayu.
Masteragu
February 26, 2007 at 4:19 pm
Can’t understand… What’s going on???
May 6, 2007 at 3:36 pm
To Rocky ‘Balbao’ Bru and Jeff ‘King Leonidas’ Ooi. Dear Sirs, we are with u! For FREEDOM! Lets whack their ass (the plaintiffs & thier
liars) into the stone age.