Sugiarso v Pang

The plaintiffs, comprising of two individuals and two companies, brought a defamation claim against the first and second defendants, who are alleged to have spoken words about the plaintiffs' business dealings. The defendants sought to strike out certain portions of the statement of claim filed by the plaintiffs. The court examined the pleadings to determine if they disclosed a reasonable cause of action and if they were not embarrassing or would not delay the fair trial of the action. The court found that the pleadings were insufficient, confusing, and failed to adequately identify the plaintiffs or link them to the words complained of. The court also found that the pleaded imputations were repetitious and did not reflect discrete assertions. The court struck out various paragraphs of the statement of claim and allowed the plaintiffs leave to replead. The court also struck out the claim for exemplary damages as the pleading was too general and did not provide sufficient particulars to justify such a claim. The court held that the plaintiffs' claim in its present form did not disclose a reasonable cause of action and was embarrassing in various respects.