Kuala lumpur: The High Court today set June 19 for case management of a defamation suit brought by businessman Datuk Seri Farhash Wafa Salvador Rizal Mubarak against activist Badrul Hisham Shaharin and an influencer over alleged defamatory statements made during an interview in May last year.
According to BERNAMA News Agency, Judge Arziah Mohamed Apandi ordered Badrul Hisham, also known as Chegubard, and influencer Nurpais Ismail to file their defences within seven days. Farhash Wafa was directed to file his reply within 14 days. Earlier, Arziah allowed the application by both defendants to set aside a previous court judgment ordering them to pay RM550,000 in damages to Farhash Wafa. The defendants filed this application to set aside the January 29 judgment, granted to the plaintiff after proceeding with the trial in their absence.
The court had delivered the judgment after finding that the writ of summons and statement of claim had been properly served through substituted service. Due to the defendants' absence, the court proceeded with an ex parte trial and heard only Farhash Wafa's side.
In today's ruling, the court found the service of the writ on both defendants defective. The defendants demonstrated they were unaware of the proceedings until after the January 29, 2026 judgment. Judge Arziah noted that Badrul Hisham denied receiving any court documents, stating that the addresses used were outdated and that an unauthorised individual had received the documents sent via courier.
The judge acknowledged that Farhash Wafa had taken reasonable steps to serve papers on the first defendant using addresses from a previous defamation case. However, since that suit was filed in 2024, no search was conducted with the National Registration Department (NRD) to obtain the first defendant's current address. The judge also noted the first defendant acted promptly by filing an application to set aside the judgment on February 4, supporting his claim of unawareness.
Regarding Nurpais Ismail, the judge mentioned that the second defendant claimed the plaintiff's affidavit stated service was made via AR registered mail, but evidence showed only ordinary registered mail. The address used was valid only until August 31, 2021, after which he moved, providing his tenancy agreement as proof. The plaintiff did not use electronic communication methods despite having the second defendant's contact details on his YouTube channel. Nurpais only learned of the judgment from a WhatsApp message on January 29, as no NRD search was conducted for his current address.
Arziah noted that both defendants raised several arguable issues, including liability for spontaneous interview statements, fair comment, and absence of malice. These issues, she said, are not frivolous but raise legal and factual questions requiring a full trial, especially in defamation law involving digital and online platforms.
At today's proceedings, lawyer Muhammad Rafique Rashid Ali represented Badrul Hisham, while Mohd Zubir Embong appeared for Nurpais. Nurin Husnina Hussein represented Farhash Wafa. Farhash Wafa filed the suit on May 26, 2025, alleging that Badrul Hisham made defamatory statements during an interview conducted by Nurpais on May 7, 2025, uploaded to Nurpais's YouTube channel, suggesting that Farhash used his position to control and manipulate large companies.