The High Court of Singapore found Bloomberg News and journalist Low De Wei liable for malicious defamation against ministers K. Shanmugam and Tan See Leng. On July 14, 2026, the court awarded each minister $230,000 in damages over an article published on December 12, 2024, about property transactions involving the ministers in 2023 [1, 2, 3, 4, 5].
The Bloomberg article reported that Shanmugam sold his former Queen Astrid Park home to UBS Trustees for $88 million, while Tan See Leng purchased a good class bungalow in Brizay Park for nearly $27.3 million [1, 2, 4, 5]. The court ruled that some claims in the article were false or published recklessly without regard for truth, with Justice Audrey Lim specifically finding that reporter Low De Wei knew the falsity or did not care about the truthfulness of key details [1, 2, 4, 5].
The ministers said the case does not involve press freedom but whether a news organisation may maliciously publish false allegations and deny a fair chance to respond. They said: "This case is not about freedom of the press. It is about whether a news organisation can maliciously target individuals, publish grave allegations founded on falsehoods, and deny those accused a fair opportunity to respond. The Court held that it cannot" [1].
Following the judgment, the ministers posted on Facebook July 17 to address media queries and reiterated that Singapore supports strong journalism balanced by responsibility. They said, "Freedom of expression carries responsibilities. It does not extend to publishing false and defamatory allegations without basis. That is the principle reaffirmed by the Court in this case" [1, 2, 3, 4, 5].
The court also rejected Bloomberg's argument that its article was part of a broader public interest story, finding that claim was a cover for publishing defamatory material [3]. Bloomberg said it respects the court's decision but maintained the reporting was accurate. The ministers said such a stance makes it difficult to reconcile with the court’s findings. "If Bloomberg truly respects the court's decision, then it should address the court's findings, as any responsible organisation should," the ministers stated [3].
