The Singapore Kindness Movement (SKM) notes that the District Court has dismissed Mr Martin Piper’s (“Mr Piper’s”) claims against SKM in District Court Originating Claim No. 1247 of 2023 (“DC/OC 1247/2023”), with respect to alleged breaches of the Personal Data Protection Act (PDPA). This outcome supports our role as a neutral and supportive facilitator encouraging direct communication between the parties involved.
From the beginning, our actions were motivated by a dedicated commitment to transparency and resolving conflicts amicably. SKM served as an impartial connector, helping Mr. Martin Piper (“Mr. Piper”) and the relevant parties address their personal matters. The District Court’s decision highlights our dedication to acting with integrity and upholding the spirit of kindness that guides our mission, ensuring you, our valued community, to stay informed and engaged.
Background of the Case
On 27 August 2022 when Mr. Piper contacted SKM, alleging that a Telegram group (“SG Families Watchgroup”) administered by Ms. Carol Loi (“Ms. Loi”) purportedly promoted discriminatory content against transgender individuals. Ms. Loi was known to SKM as the co-founder of the Ground-Up Movement (GUM) SGFamilies, a volunteer group supported by SKM as part of its Kindred Spirit Circle (KSC) which has 160 volunteers. The members, both individuals and groups, of the KSC, are not employees of SKM.
Mr. Piper provided his personal data, including his full name and email, with the intent of prompting SKM to investigate the group’s alleged activities.
On 31 August 2022, SKM engaged Ms. Loi to address the concerns raised by Mr. Piper, during which Ms. Loi clarified that the Telegram group, SG Families Watchgroup, was unrelated to the SGFamilies GUM or to SKM. Dr William Wan (“Dr Wan”), SKM’s General Secretary at that time, informed Ms. Loi via phone call of SKM’s intention to connect her directly with Mr. Piper through email, as SKM was not involved in the matter between both parties. Ms. Loi agreed to this.
To facilitate a transparent investigation and address the allegations, SKM shared Mr. Piper’s identity to Ms. Loi. On 7th September 2022, Mr. Karun S’Baram facilitated the connection by emailing Ms. Loi and copying Mr. Piper, explaining that despite our previous response, Mr. Piper had provided further evidence and that Ms. Loi should directly address the allegations. Ms. Loi requested for the correspondence between SKM and Mr. Piper to respond more comprehensively.
Mr. Piper subsequently claimed this disclosure violated the PDPA and led to emotional distress and financial costs after Ms. Loi filed a Protection from Harassment Act (POHA) claim against him. SKM was not aware nor informed of the POHA claim taken against Mr. Piper by Ms. Loi at the time where SKM connected both parties via email.
Key Findings of the Court
The court found that Mr. Piper was “deemed to have consented” to SKM’s disclosure under Section 15 of the PDPA, which applies when an individual voluntarily provides personal data to an organisation for a specific purpose. In particular, among other things, the Court observed that Mr Piper himself had testified in court that the purpose of the 27 August Email was to have SKM investigate the relevant complaint. In this light, the Court found that (i) Mr Piper has therefore provided his identity to SKM for the purposes of the defendant acting on his complaint about Ms Loi and her Telegram Group and that (ii) it is also reasonable that Mr Piper would voluntarily provide his identity for that purpose. The Court also found that there was no evidence of fraudulent or malicious intention on the part of SKM in disclosing the claimant’s identity to Ms. Loi. In this regard, the Court placed emphasis on Dr Wan’s testimony, in particular, where he said in the spirit of maintaining good faith, SKM suggested direct communication between the individuals concerned. Given the established email communication preference among the parties, this suggestion was hence conveyed via email, with all parties included in the correspondence. This approach reflected an expectation of professional and transparent interaction among adults in the public sphere.
Furthermore, the court noted that no contravention of Sections 13, 14, or 18 of the PDPA occurred.
Dismissal of Claims for Damages
In addition to the findings on the alleged PDPA breaches, the court found that Mr. Piper did not suffer any financial losses or emotional distress directly related to SKM’s actions. His claims were largely associated with subsequent events, including Ms. Loi’s Protection from Harassment Act (POHA) filing, which was determined to be independent of SKM’s conduct.
SKM’s Legal counsel / Reaffirmation to Organisation Mission and Values
SKM would like to sincerely thank our counsel, Mr Gregory Vijayendran, SC and Ms Meher Malhotra of Rajah & Tann Singapore LLP, for their pro bono service and invaluable legal support in this case. Their commitment and professionalism have been instrumental in guiding us through this complex legal matter.
We regret any inconvenience caused and stand by our intention to resolve the matter through proper and respectful communication between the involved parties.
SKM will continue to encourage open and constructive dialogue between all parties involved in any disputes or concerns in compliance with applicable laws and regulations.