He also said the court agreed with the High Court and Court of Appeal that the words complained of by RAGM in the second article were not the actual words uttered or published by Hue Shieh Lee but the words were in fact a report or statements by a reporter.
Justice Ramly said RAGM had failed to call the reporter as a witness during the trial, to prove that she had interviewed Hue and Hue had actually uttered those words.
He said RAGM's claim for malicious falsehood based on the two articles must also fall as RAGM failed to show that it suffered any special damage as a result of publication of the articles.
"In the present case, the respondent (Hue) merely read out the survey results and expressed concerns of the residents. She merely reported the information that was obtained from the survey carried out by the residents," said Justice Ramly.
He said none of the residents were called as witnesses to show that the results conveyed by Hue were not true.
Justice Ramly ordered RAGM to pay RM60,000 in costs.
The other judges on the bench were Justices Tan Sri Azahar Mohamed, Datuk Sri Balia Yusof Wahi, Datuk Rohana Yusuf and Datuk Setia Mohd Zawawi Salleh.
RAGM filed the lawsuit against Hue, who was the president of an activist group called the Anti-Cyanide Group in 2013, seeking damages over two articles published by the online portals, Malaysiakini and Free Malaysia Today in 2012.
RAGM claimed the words uttered by her were untrue and were based on facts that were not verified by the relevant authorities and sought for general damages, exemplary damages and aggravated damages for libel and malicious falsehood.