No appeal from Bloomberg on Shanmugam, Tan See Leng defamation case

The news outlet and Mr Low must also pay S$423,000 in costs and disbursements. 

Mr Shanmugam noted that Bloomberg had maintained after the court’s judgment that its reporting was accurate and the article was a “solid story”. 

“Bloomberg’s decision not to appeal the High Court’s decision reveals its true assessment of the legal merits. It has chosen to leave the court’s findings of malice, falsehoods and wrongful conduct unchallenged, on the record,” he said. 

Dr Tan said in a Facebook post on Saturday that the matter had come to a close after the appeal deadline’s passing. 

“Glad to have been able to clear our positions and uphold the standing and integrity of the public offices we hold,” he said. 

“Our focus remains where it has always been — on our commitment and work for Singapore and Singaporeans,” he added. 

DEFAMATION SUIT 

The Bloomberg article opened with a line: “Singapore’s ultra-rich are increasingly cloaking their purchases of mansions in the city-state in secrecy.”

After referencing a S$3 billion money laundering scandal and how criminals linked to the case were convicted, jailed and deported, the article said buyers of high-end homes would rather keep their purchases under the radar.

The article then named Dr Tan and Mr Shanmugam and referred to their respective GCB transactions.

Bloomberg and Mr Low had contested the claims, saying the article was about broader trends in Singapore’s GCB market rather than about the ministers personally, or any wrongdoing on their part.

However, the judge rejected this argument, saying that the article – when read as a whole – linked the ministers’ transactions with claims about secrecy, opacity and money laundering, creating a defamatory impression.

She also rejected Bloomberg’s reliance on a public interest defence known as the Reynolds defence in UK law, saying it is not part of Singapore law.