The Summary Judgement: Ass Loon Vs Roy Ngerng

Re: Roy Ngerng – The saga takes a nasty turn

Saisyu said:

Press sec to PM Lee refutes allegations over her statement on blogger's case

Published on Jan 13, 2015 4:17 PM

Blogger Roy Ngerng (left) with his lawyer M. Ravi (right) leave the Supreme Court in Singapore on Jan 12, 2015. Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong's press secretary on Jan 13 refuted allegations that her comments in a statement to the media the day before over a closed-door defamation hearing against Mr Ngerng were "inaccurate". -- PHOTO: AFP

By Walter Sim

SINGAPORE - Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong's press secretary today refuted allegations that her comments in a statement to the media on Monday over a closed-door defamation hearing against blogger Roy Ngerng were "inaccurate".

Ms Chang Li Lin had, on Monday, said Mr Ngerng's lawyer "indicated at the hearing that Mr Ngerng did not want to be cross-examined."

But lawyer M. Ravi, representing Mr Ngerng, said in a letter to Ms Chang - released to the media early on Tuesday - that she was "inaccurate" and "misinformed".

In a five-page media statement, Ms Chang cited notes taken by lawyers from Drew & Napier, who represent Mr Lee, at the closed-door session where Mr Ngerng, 33, was ordered to pay $29,000 in costs for legal fees and related expenses. Damages for defamation will be assessed in later hearings.

Mr Ravi said in his letter that based on his recollection, he did not tell the court that Mr Ngerng did not want to be cross-examined. Instead, what he said was that he had to take instructions from his client, which was a "common and normal practice".

He also said it would be "illogical" for the court to ask him to confirm whether Mr Ngerng would give evidence by Jan 30 had he already said Mr Ngerng would not.

But Ms Chang, citing transcripts, said there had been a "hasty U-turn" by Mr Ravi.

She wrote: "Mr Ravi had informed the Court that Mr Ngerng would rely on the affidavit filed by him in the earlier summary judgment application as his evidence for the purposes of the assessment of damages.

"Mr Davinder Singh (from Drew & Napier) then gave Mr Ravi notice that if Mr Ngerng was going to give evidence for the purposes of the assessment of damages, Mr Singh would be cross-examining Mr Ngerng.

"Whereupon Mr Ravi promptly changed his position, and informed the Court that Mr Ngerng would "Therefore" not be filing any evidence," she said.

"This was the clearest indication that Mr Ngerng did not want to be cross-examined," she added. "And even after he tried to end the discussion, the Court asked Mr Ravi to consider the matter and let the Court and Drew & Napier know by 30 Jan 2015 if Mr Ngerng would be giving evidence."

She also addressed a question Mr Ravi had asked, whether it was appropriate for the Prime Minister's press secretary to issue statements in connection with the case.

"He appears to have forgotten that, as the Court has found Mr Ngerng falsely alleged that 'the plaintiff, the Prime Minister of Singapore… is guilty of criminal misappropriation of the monies paid by Singaporeans to the CPF'.

"It is therefore entirely proper for me to deal with this matter as the Prime Minister's press secretary," she added.

[email protected]

Click to expand...

Only the stupid believes in the PAP Press version of issues involving the PAP.

Re: Roy Ngerng – The saga takes a nasty turn

This latest actions by the PM open up lots of questions:

1. The PM justifies the higher legal fees of $50k, claiming that Ordinary Roy has written more defamatory articles.
Who is the PM to decide what is defamatory? If he thinks it is defamatory, then he should launch another lawsuit based on those articles. Since those articles have not been proven to be defamatory, then LHL does not have the justification to use them to push up his legal bill against Ordinary Roy.

2. The PM publicly paid Press Secretary is issuing statements on this private lawsuit
The Press Secretary claims that the PM is suing in his official capacity. Then the question is why doesn't he use state resources - the government has lots of highly paid lawyers in the civil service - instead, he chose to spend public money to engage outside lawyers to handle the suit?

3. Is PM's integrity or the government's integrity being challenged?
The government's integrity is being impeach, so why shouldn't the govenment sue, instead, it is the PM to sue? So, LHL doesn't really care about the reputation of the government but just his own?

4. Who is keeping the award?
If it is the PM who is suing, why has he not declare that the money goes to government coffers? In the past, his father sues and the money didn't go to government coffers. LHL should come out and state that the money goes to the government. And his lawyers should consider this as public service by not charging any fees.

frenchbriefs said:

Useless...might as well go be Islamic terrorists,they have belief too.what's the point of having belief if u can't put together a plan,carry it out and win ur objectives and build an empire?where's ur organization? Where's ur army?even ISIS and charlie hedbo terrorist are more capable than Roy.if I donate 100k to charlie hedbo terrorists right now France will topple.

Click to expand...

What a strange analogy. What does a civil protestor has to do with extremist actions? Both advocate a very different path. Gandhi did not have guns and an army too, though i am not saying Roy is akin to Gandhi, just a symbolic representation of peaceful protest.

I guess to each his own then. You carry on with your beliefs and I mine.

Re: Roy Ngerng – The saga takes a nasty turn

Cerebral said:

What a strange analogy. What does a civil protestor has to do with extremist actions? Both advocate a very different path. Gandhi did not have guns and an army too, though i am not saying Roy is akin to Gandhi, just a symbolic representation of peaceful protest.

I guess to each his own then. You carry on with your beliefs and I mine.

Click to expand...

everyone was once a civil protestor,ghandi was a civil protestor,hitler was a civil protestor,LKY was a civil protestor,how do they rise to power?how do they establish a power structure?how do they gain influence?what tactics do they use along the way?if u cant be like them,what can u do?create ur own organisation?create ur own company or conglomerate?grow in size and power and pull strings from behind the scenes?how did Putin rise to power?roy is not a powerful businessman,he is not a influential figure,he doesnt have backing from powerful people or organisations what can he do?

Re: Roy Ngerng – The saga takes a nasty turn

frenchbriefs said:

its not like he had any money in the first place.

Click to expand...

It matters not... Roy is fighting for us. He deserves every cent from us.

Anyone... whether a bankrupt or poor man, if he is willing to stand up to the PAP, has my full support!

Re: Roy Ngerng – The saga takes a nasty turn

frenchbriefs said:

roy is not a powerful businessman,he is not a influential figure,he doesnt have backing from powerful people or organisations what can he do?

Click to expand...

It matters not. Roy is a protestor. I like him as he is... a protestor and fighter.

Re: Roy Ngerng – The saga takes a nasty turn

Papsmearer said:

So would I.

Click to expand...

I salute you honourable Singaporeans, for your generosity to another Singaporean, who dare to speak up.
United you will stand.
Keep it up, those who "donated" or intend to donate to help that individual.

Re: Roy Ngerng – The saga takes a nasty turn

Cerebral said:

It doesn't matter whether he is made to look like a loser. At least he dare to stand behind what he believed in.

I may not have Roy's fortitude, but I am willing to chip in when he needs; a little something to make his journey a little easier. This is my silent protest.

Click to expand...

Keep up the good work, and your "donation"

Re: Roy Ngerng – The saga takes a nasty turn

Reddog said:

I am waiting to give money to Roy. My chance to 'slap' pinky as envisaged by the great gms.

Click to expand...

I have given and will give. Let it be known that the money is from true blood Singaporean!

Re: Roy Ngerng – The saga takes a nasty turn

rover2sg said:

I have given and will give. Let it be known that the money is from true blood Singaporean!

Click to expand...

Keep it up, and your financial support for this Singaporean.

Re: Roy Ngerng – The saga takes a nasty turn

Charlie99 said:

Keep it up, and your financial support for this Singaporean.

Click to expand...

Re: Roy Ngerng – The saga takes a nasty turn

methink said:

Click to expand...

Freedom of speech and free press

PM’s Press Sec: Entirely proper for me to be involved

http://www.tremeritus.com/2015/01/13/pms-press-sec-entirely-proper-for-me-to-be-involved/

Ms Chang continued, “From the notes, it is clear that Mr Ravi had informed the Court that Mr Ngerng would rely on the affidavit filed by him in the earlier summary judgment application as his evidence for the purposes of the assessment of damages. Mr Davinder Singh then gave Mr Ravi notice that if Mr Ngerng was going to give evidence for the purposes of the assessment of damages, Mr Singh would be cross-examining Mr Ngerng. Whereupon Mr Ravi promptly changed his position, and informed the Court that Mr Ngerng would ‘Therefore’ not be filing any evidence.”

This was the clearest indication that Mr Ngerng did not want to be cross-examined, she said.

“After saying that Mr Ngerng intended to rely on an earlier affidavit as his evidence, Mr Ravi did a hasty U-turn after Mr Singh said that he will cross-examine Mr Ngerng if he gives evidence. Mr Ravi was so determined that Mr Ngerng not be cross-examined that he even said to the Court ‘Enough Y[our] H[onour] I won’t be filing’,” she added.

Re: PM’s Press Sec: Entirely proper for me to be involved

If the PM Press Secretary is entitled to respond in her official capacity because it is the PM in his official capacity is being defamed, who is going to fund the suit? Are Drew and Napier legal fees going to be funded by taxpayers?

A peanut lawyer like M Ravi charges more than a Senior Counsel?

Weird isn't it. M Ravi charges $70,000 but Davinder Singh, a Senior counsel only charges less than half of what M Ravi charges!

Re: A peanut lawyer like M Ravi charges more than a Senior Counsel?

Lawyer M Ravi as the defending lawyer has to file motions after motions etc comparing to the bayi singh who just has to file the charges.

Bayi needs only summary judgment to close the matter while the defending lawyer has to put up arguments to stop the process from going forward. More work doing the defending than a mere imposing of Summary Judgment.

Re: A peanut lawyer like M Ravi charges more than a Senior Counsel?

Isogallardo said:

Weird isn't it. M Ravi charges $70,000 but Davinder Singh, a Senior counsel only charges less than half of what M Ravi charges!

Click to expand...

simple.......ravi did the papers hiimself while bayee got the job done by intern

Re: A peanut lawyer like M Ravi charges more than a Senior Counsel?

Hans168 said:

simple.......ravi did the papers hiimself while bayee got the job done by intern

Click to expand...

Ya lor. I am sure M ravi dont have interns or assistance.

So who is that behind them? Probably not Ravi's assistant.

http://www.channelnewsasia.com/news/singapore/allegations-by-ngerng-s/1587240.html?cid=FBSG

Re: PM’s Press Sec: Entirely proper for me to be involved

is this CB paid personally out of LHLz pocket???

Re: A peanut lawyer like M Ravi charges more than a Senior Counsel?

maybe supply and demand? not many lawyer willing to defend roy