Contact Information

Oak Avenue, Manhattan Beach, California 90266

Contact Us

SINGAPORE -A woman who was deemed “to seek revenge” by the court against a doctor was dismissed on Wednesday (April 7).

Miss Serene Tiong was indicted on charges of difamation on behalf of Dr Julian Ong for a claim of a breach of the duties of director of the company, buying 19% more stake in Dr Ong’s firm, against HC Surgical Specialist (HCSS), Chief Executive Operating Officer, Heah Sieu Min, on behalf of HCSS.

Woman Revenge Seeking
Image Source: The Straits Times

Last year, after finding she had a vendetta and a lack of good faith, the High Court rejected her application.The Court of Appeal rejected Ms Tiong’s appeal against last year’s judgment on Wednesday, stating that she was motivated by vengeance and had a history of dispute with Dr Ong.

Ms Tiong filed a lawsuit against Dr. Ong in 2018, claiming that he and another medical expert conspired to have sex with vulnerable woman patients.

Since she distributed the complaint to other physicians, Dr. Ong sued her for defamation the following year.Continuing to investigate the Singapore Medical Council.A day prior to the AGM, Mrs. Tiong purchased 100 shares in the company, on Sept 25, 2019.

She has participated in the AGM and raised concern about the acquisition of 19 percent.Ms. Tiong alleged that Dr. Heah had broken with due diligence her duties to act and that he had not rejected the decision-making process on Dr. Ong’s 19% acquisition.In explaining why Mrs Tiong’s application had been rejected with costs, the High Court said last year that she was “so vendetta motivated, perceived or true, that the judgment would be clouded with purely personal considerations.”

READ:  Business climate goals must be decided by research, managers claim.

Justice Andrew Phang on Wednesday stated that the matter for Mrs Tiong was “wholly unmeritorious,” but it would not be of use to the company even if the intended legal action was successful.

He noted that the company had acted in its own business interests and wasted claims of the alleged commercial interest of Ms Tiong in the company as her purchased shares were worth only approximately 44 dollars just a day before their General Meeting.”Her central motive is revenge,” said Justice Phang.

“We recognise that Ms Tiong suffered deep, emotional scars, but legal relief must come via the correct route.”

Ms Tiong has been ordered to pay costs of $15,000 to the company and $30,000 to Dr Heah.

Source: The Straits Times

Notify of
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments