Kuala lumpur: The High Court here has proposed that the civil suit filed by renowned high-performance transformation coach Syed Mohammad Murad Syed Naseem, better known as Murad 'Baddestcoach' Zaidi, against social media influencer Caprice, be resolved through mediation. Caprice's counsel, Megat Syazlee Mokhtarom, confirmed that the suggestion was made by Judge Kan Weng Hin during an in-chambers case management last Monday.
According to BERNAMA News Agency, the judge proposed that both parties attempt mediation. However, the plaintiff, Murad Zaidi, did not agree to the suggestion. The court has scheduled December 9 for the next case management session. Murad Zaidi's counsel, Datuk M. Reza Hassan, also verified this development.
On November 8, the High Court recorded a consent order requiring Caprice, whose real name is Ariz Ramli, to immediately remove and withdraw nine defamatory statements published on his Instagram account against Murad Zaidi. The order was documented after Caprice agreed to comply and also undertook not to republish, redistribute, or disseminate any of the alleged statements in any form.
According to a draft consent order, Caprice also agreed to refrain from making any further remarks or representations of a similar nature against Murad Zaidi, who is widely recognised for redefining elite fitness and corporate performance culture in Malaysia through his flagship brand, Badcave Training Facility. Following this undertaking, Murad Zaidi withdrew his interim injunction application against Caprice, with no order as to costs. However, the main defamation suit is proceeding.
On August 4, Murad Zaidi filed the suit, claiming that Caprice had uploaded false and malicious content portraying him as being involved in criminal activities and organised crime. As a result of the publications, the plaintiff claimed that his reputation and dignity were damaged, noting that the defendant commands significant influence on Instagram with more than 1.5 million followers.
Murad Zaidi is seeking an injunction to restrain the defendant and his agents from publishing or repeating defamatory posts about him, as well as a video apology on all of the defendant's social media platforms, along with damages, costs, and any other relief deemed appropriate by the court. Meanwhile, in his statement of defence, the defendant maintained that his remarks were made without malice.