Lahore Court Throws Out Appeal Against Zia Chishti Defamation Verdict

Court rules that Chishti's lawyers had successfully established that the papers were served properly at the correct address used by the defendant

Lahore Court Throws Out Appeal Against Zia Chishti Defamation Verdict

A Lahore court has dismissed an appeal filed by a magazine to set aside the defamation judgment in favour of Pakistani-American tech entrepreneur Zia Chishti, documents show.
 
In May this year, Chishti had been awarded a major defamation lawsuit against the local magazine and its editor over false, defamatory and malicious allegations.

In a report carried in Narratives Magazine, serious accusations had been levelled against Chishti, labelling his reputation as "toxic" and citing allegations of sexual misconduct and violation of securities and other corporate laws against him. 
 
When Chishti took the matter to court, Lahore Additional District Judge Muhammad Farhan Nabi ruled that Chishti was defamed without any basis and out of malice. In a scathing ruling, the judge stated that the publication had offered no credible evidence whatsoever in its defence and that the magazine had caused Chishti severe damage. The district court awarded Chishti the largest defamation damages award in Pakistan history, stating that the editor "is also directed to publish a clarification along with apology in his magazine regarding the article in question".

The magazine's editor had subsequently appealed to overturn this judgment. He contended that there had been improper notice of service, which violated his right to a fair trial. He further contended that he learnt of the suit and the ex-parte judgment only after reporters reached out to him for his version on the matter, and a report was published in local media, The News and Geo.

He urged the court to set aside the earlier ex-parte order against him on the principle that "no one should be condemned unheard."  

Hearing the appeal, Lahore Additional District and Sessions Judge Farhan Nabi, rejected the appeal. The judge ruled that Chishti's lawyers had successfully established before the court that the papers were served properly at the correct address used by the defendant, an appropriate representative received the service, the service was legally effective, and the applicant's failure to appear before the court was intentional. 

Additionally, the judge noted that the defendant's documents showed previous business activities at the address where the notice had been served, which contradicted their claim of an incorrect address.  

Reacting to the verdict, the magazine editor, in a statement, said: "The court decision is surprising and has not taken into account that I was not informed about the filing of this case. I came to know about it through Geo and The News reporter. It was an ex-parte, one-sided decision. I can defend my story in court. I am challenging it in the High Court."

The case in Pakistan will likely have broader ramifications for Chishti, who has filed several defamation lawsuits, including one against Britain's powerful right-wing paper The Telegraph. In late 2021 and early 2022, The Telegraph published a series of articles about Chishti. 

The original case

Chishti is a serial tech entrepreneur who founded the multibillion-dollar company behind Invisalign dental braces and the artificial intelligence company Afiniti. Former President Mamnoon Hussain had awarded Chishti the Sitara-e-Imtiaz in 2018.

As with the Pakistani magazine, Britain's The Telegraph had picked up on allegations by Chishti's former employee, Tatiana Spottiswoode, who made potentially damaging disclosures before the US Congress in November 2021.
 
Chishti has also sued Spottiswoode and her attorneys for defamation in the United States. In his US complaint, he included text conversations with Spottiswoode that seemingly indicate a consensual relationship. The evidence shows the relationship was based on mutual consent and trust, spread over months and years. A key part of Spottiswoode's defence appears to be that because her allegations against Chishti were made to the US Congress, she apparently enjoys legal immunity against Chishti's defamation lawsuit.