...

In the Counterclaim, our clients have claimed that the suit is an abuse of the court’s process and is a form of a SLAPP intended to silence our clients.

Our clients are seeking not only a dismissal of the suit but also damages against Beaks and Suria for violating our clients’ right to freedom of speech and expression.

The trial of the case has been fixed for 27 to 30 October 2025. In the meantime, the Court will assess the monetary damages that Beaks and Suria are due to pay our clients for the damage caused by them in obtaining the ex parte injunction.

Specifically, in response to Beaks and Suria, our clients state that they have to date, failed, refused, and/or neglected to address the core points raised by our clients.

The facts are clear: Under the employment contracts with the workers, Beaks and Suria were to pay the workers RM1,500 a month, and the workers’ passports could not be held by their employers. Beaks and Suria have not fulfilled the said employment terms but have breached them.

If it is true that the workers have been paid their wages every month, Beaks and Suria are challenged to produce all the relevant pay slips now.

If it is true that the passports are not held by Beaks and Suria (or their representatives or agents), Beaks and Suria are challenged to produce evidence that the passports were returned to the workers.

If it is true that jobs were offered to the workers, Beaks and Suria are challenged to produce credible evidence of those job offers. Note that the workers are entitled to refuse work if they are asked to work for companies that are not their employers, as it breaches their permits to work for non-employers.

...