The Inquiry Pte Ltd v Attorney-General
Outcome
Appeal dismissedI dismiss the appeals.
Source: [2023] SGHC 247, High Court (General Division), decided 6 September 2023. Read directly from the judgment.
Key facts
| Court | High Court (General Division) |
|---|---|
| Decided | |
| Judge | Valerie Thean |
| Charges / claim | Statutory Interpretation |
| Outcome | Appeal dismissed |
| Counsel | Attorney-General's Chambers, Audent Chambers LLC, Oon & Bazul LLP, Allen Lye Xin Ren, Angela Phoon Yan Ling, Han Guangyuan Keith, Jeyendran s/o Jeyapal, Leong Hoi Seng Victor, Tan Ruyan Kristy, Tan Zhengxian Jordan, Tan Zhongshan |
Source: [2023] SGHC 247, High Court (General Division), decided — eLitigation. Updated .
Catchwords
Practice Areas
Judges (1)
Counsel (11)
Case Significance
The Inquiry Pte Ltd v Attorney-General and another matter [2023] SGHC 247 is a reserved judgment of Valerie Thean J in the General Division of the High Court, delivered on 6 September 2023 in Originating Applications Nos 764 and 765 of 2023. The applicant, The Inquiry Pte Ltd, which operates the online magazine Jom, filed two appeals under s 17 of the Protection from Online Falsehoods and Manipulation Act 2019 to set aside two Correction Directions issued to it under s 11 of POFMA in relation to an article titled "Singapore This Week" published on 7 July 2023. The appeals engage s 17(5)(a) of POFMA and the framework in The Online Citizen Pte Ltd v Attorney-General [2021] 2 SLR 1358; the judgment addresses the statutory construction of POFMA.
[2023] SGHC 247 explained
The Inquiry Pte Ltd v Attorney-General ([2023] SGHC 247) is a Singapore judgment decided by the High Court (General Division) on 6 September 2023. It is categorised under Statutory Interpretation. It is a recent decision; within this corpus no later judgment has cited it yet. This page summarises what the reported decision covers and links the primary sources — the full judgment, the statutes it cites, and the other cases it engages with — so the decision can be read in context. It is reference information, not legal advice, and it does not state the outcome or any holding beyond what the official judgment records.
What is [2023] SGHC 247 about?
The Inquiry Pte Ltd v Attorney-General ([2023] SGHC 247) is a High Court (General Division) decision from 2023. Its published catchwords are “Statutory Interpretation — Construction of statute — Protection from Online Falsehoods and Manipulation Act 2019”, which indicate the subject matter the judgment addresses. The full reasoning and orders are in the judgment itself, linked below.
Which legislation does [2023] SGHC 247 consider?
The judgment refers to Protection from Online Falsehoods and Manipulation Act. The statutes cited are listed in full on this page, each linking to its primary text.
Summary
The Inquiry Pte Ltd, which operates the online magazine Jom, filed two appeals under s 17 of the Protection from Online Falsehoods and Manipulation Act 2019 to set aside two Correction Directions issued in respect of an article about the Ridout Road matter. The appeals engaged s 17(5)(a) of POFMA and the framework in The Online Citizen. The High Court dismissed both appeals.
What was The Inquiry Pte Ltd v Attorney-General [2023] SGHC 247 about?
It was two appeals by The Inquiry Pte Ltd, operator of the online magazine Jom, before Valerie Thean J to set aside two Correction Directions issued under s 11 of POFMA, engaging s 17(5)(a) of the Act, decided on 6 September 2023.
What prompted the Correction Directions in [2023] SGHC 247?
The Correction Directions under s 11 of POFMA related to an article titled "Singapore This Week" that The Inquiry Pte Ltd published on 7 July 2023 on its Jom webpage; the appeals under s 17 sought to set those directions aside.
Statutes Cited
Cases Cited (3)
Related cases
Other Singapore judgments involving the same parties or counsel.
Referenced in
Legal concepts & references
Judgment
Read the full judgment on the official Singapore Courts portal.
Read on eLitigationSource: eLitigation ([2023] SGHC 247)