Sukamto ordered to pay S$132m to former partner Low

SINGAPORE — The dramatic fallout between two tycoons, which has dragged on in the courtroom for more than six years, has ended with a High Court ordering one to pay the other S$280,000 in damages for defamation — believed to be one of the highest for such cases not involving politicians.

Mr Sukamto Sia, 55, must also pay Indonesian magnate Low Tuck Kwong an additional S$132 million for an initial share sale that was foiled by his defamatory remarks.

The legal feud between the former friends began in July 2008 when Mr Low was one month from an initial public offering launch for coal producer Bayan Resources.

Mr Sia sent letters to the Indonesia Stock Exchange’s managing director, among others, alleging that Mr Low, 67, had reneged on giving him half a stake in the firm. The purported promise was for a S$3 million loan Mr Low sought from him in 1995 to start the coal-mining venture, Mr Sia had said.

As a result, Mr Low was unable to sell 375 million shares that were worth at least S$334 million, he told the court when he sued the former Bank of Honolulu chairman in October that year.

After being locked in a battle for years, Mr Low won the case in November 2013, with the Court of Appeal agreeing that Mr Sia had made false and malicious claims and ordering compensation for injuring the former’s reputation.

The court also granted special damages to Mr Low for the failed IPO as well as for the opportunity he would have had to invest proceeds from the listing.

Yesterday, Justice Belinda Ang ruled that Mr Sia must pay S$200,000 in general damages and S$80,000 in aggravated damages, for defamation. She decided on S$132 million in damages for the lost business Mr Low suffered.

Mr Low, represented by Senior Counsel Davinder Singh and Tony Yeo of Drew & Napier, was also awarded the costs of the appeal and trial.

Past defamation cases that did not involve politicians, but attracted comparable compensation amounts, include the S$210,000 granted to former “remisier king” Peter Lim in the long-running Raffles Town Club legal spat.

Mr Lim, a former consultant to Raffles Town Club, launched a libel suit against Mr Lin Jian Wei and Ms Margaret Tung — who took over the club in 2001 — for defamatory remarks they had made to settle a separate lawsuit brought by unhappy club members. Among other things, their statement wrote that dividends totalling S$124 million had been paid out since the club’s inception, but did not mention that a large part of this was paid to themselves.

In deciding on the amount, the appellate court then noted Mr Lim’s position as a prominent businessman who built up a formidable reputation in the stockbroking industry and who was frequently cited as one of the richest men in Singapore and Asia. The statement attacked Mr Lim’s professional reputation and standing and “called into question his competence, integrity and business acumen”, the court had found.

In another notable case, Mr Arul Chandran, lawyer and former president of The Tanglin Club, was in 2000 awarded S$150,000 in a defamation suit against architect Victor Chew. In a letter to the club’s president, Mr Chew had described Mr Arul as a “most vicious and dangerous fraud” and unfit to be the club’s vice-president, which the High Court ruled to be motivated by “personal spite, ill will and vengeance” in order to destroy the latter’s reputation.