Bloomberg defamation: Publication, reporter to pay $290k in legal costs to Shanmugam, Tan See Leng

In a judgment dated July 14, Lim found that real estate reporter Low De Wei, who wrote the piece headlined “Singapore mansion deals are increasingly shrouded in secrecy”, knew certain information used was false, or had published the piece without caring whether it was true.

The judge said Bloomberg’s conduct in removing the paywall for the article also demonstrated malice, adding that it was done to make the article accessible to the broader public.

The article, published on Dec 12, 2024, mentioned the ministers’ property deals in 2023 – the sale of Shanmugam’s former home in the Queen Astrid Park area to UBS Trustees for $88 million and Tan’s non-caveated purchase of a bungalow in Brizay Park for nearly $27.3 million.

It stated that the ultra-rich in Singapore are increasingly cloaking their purchases of mansions in secrecy, such as by using trusts to keep their identities private.

It also stated that deals made without the filing of caveats are “harder to track” because they do not show up in a database maintained by the Urban Redevelopment Authority.

A caveat is a legal document that a person can lodge with the Singapore Land Authority to prevent others from buying a property.

The judge found that readers’ understanding of the article would be that the ministers had taken advantage of the absence of checks and balances or disclosure requirements to conduct their property transactions in a non-transparent manner.

She said the article conveyed to the reader that there are GCB deals being kept hidden from even the Government, and that there is a regulatory gap which buyers can exploit.

They would also understand the article to mean that the ministers had done so to hide their transactions and avoid scrutiny – acts that might extend to the possibility of money laundering.

In assessing the amount of damages to be awarded to Shanmugam and Tan, the judge considered the defendants’ conduct.

“I find there was malice on the defendants’ part,” she said, adding that malice in defamation means “any ill-will, spite or some wrong or improper motive”.