allenleonhart
Senior Member
and i suspect his very own comments could be used against him in the court of law.
to Mr Hong, i quote u.
"Angelina of Lavena Shoes is a cheat as well. "
"Is she not cheating me as well? This is the kettle calling the pot black.
"It actually took half a day of work, not a whole day as she claims, so she lied and she is a cheat as well."
u admit in ur capacity as the managing editor that you have cheated and scammed a person, while on the other hand still insist that she has cheated you without providing any evidences to back up ur statements.
in short, i believe u have just defamed TS as u have posted comments which will directly affect her business and it is falsehood for now as u have not proven ur mentioned claims true.
under the defamation act, u can be charged in court.
on the other hand, TS has shown a letter which proves that there is a written contract which both parties have accepted. and u have not uphold ur side of the deal.
on section 8.88 (wad a lucky number) of singapore contract law it is mentioned that
and in 8.89
u are also legally responsible for a breach of contract in this matter.
i'm not a legal expert, and this is at least my interpretation of the current defamation act.it may not be accurate as i am not a professional dealing with law. if there are any experts out there, pls advise.
to Mr Hong, i quote u.
"Angelina of Lavena Shoes is a cheat as well. "
"Is she not cheating me as well? This is the kettle calling the pot black.
"It actually took half a day of work, not a whole day as she claims, so she lied and she is a cheat as well."
u admit in ur capacity as the managing editor that you have cheated and scammed a person, while on the other hand still insist that she has cheated you without providing any evidences to back up ur statements.
in short, i believe u have just defamed TS as u have posted comments which will directly affect her business and it is falsehood for now as u have not proven ur mentioned claims true.
under the defamation act, u can be charged in court.
on the other hand, TS has shown a letter which proves that there is a written contract which both parties have accepted. and u have not uphold ur side of the deal.
on section 8.88 (wad a lucky number) of singapore contract law it is mentioned that
In the absence of a lawful excuse, a breach of contract has two significant effects.
and in 8.89
http://www.singaporelaw.sg/content/ContractLaw.htmlFirst, if the breach of contract by one contracting party (the ‘party-in-breach’causes loss to the other (the ‘aggrieved party’
, the party-in-breach may be ordered by the courts to compensate the aggrieved party in money damages for those losses, in lieu of the primary obligations left unperformed under the contract. However, contractual damages (which are compensatory and not punitive in nature), is not the only judicial remedy available. Other types of remedies may be available in lieu, or sometimes, in addition to damages, depending on the nature of the obligation which has been breached.
u are also legally responsible for a breach of contract in this matter.
i'm not a legal expert, and this is at least my interpretation of the current defamation act.it may not be accurate as i am not a professional dealing with law. if there are any experts out there, pls advise.
Last edited: