Lee Hsien Loong v Leong Sze Hian 10 [2021] SGHC 66 On 9 November 2018, it was further reported in the Straits Times that the Monetary Authority of Singapore had filed a police report in respect of an article materially similar to the Article in question which had been published on 5 November 2018 on the States Times Review (the “STR”), a website which claims to be an Australia-based blog covering Singapore news.10 Further, the Straits Times also reported on the IMDA’s issuance of a statement that the article on the STR’s website was “baseless and defamatory”.11 11 As outlined earlier, the defendant removed the Post from his Facebook Timeline on 10 November 2018. On 12 November 2018, he received a Letter of Demand from the plaintiff’s then-solicitors, Drew & Napier LLC, demanding, inter alia, a published apology and compensation.12 This letter does not appear to have been replied to. On 20 November 2018, the plaintiff commenced the instant suit. Procedural history 12 The defendant previously sought to mount a counterclaim against the plaintiff in the tort of abuse of process. The plaintiff applied in SUM 148/2019 for the said counterclaim to be struck out pursuant to O 18 r 19 of the Rules of Court (Cap 322, R 5, 2014 Ed) (“ROC”). That application was granted, and the appeal against that decision was dismissed. 13 The defendant had also applied to strike out the plaintiff’s claim in SUM 428/2019 (“SUM 428”), but was unsuccessful. This application was heard together with SUM 148/2019. 10 2 AB 1236 to 1241. 11 2 AB 1252 to 1253. 12 2 AB 1271 to 1274. 5