Back
HIGH COURT MALAYA KUALA LUMPUR
CHEN JIN QUAN – Appellant
Versus
TENAGA NASIONAL BERHAD – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. introduction of the appeal context. (Para 1 , 2 , 3) |
| 2. background facts of the case and allegations. (Para 4 , 5 , 6 , 7 , 8 , 9 , 10) |
| 3. burden of proof principles in judicial proceedings. (Para 11 , 12 , 13) |
| 4. responsibility for proving signature authenticity. (Para 14 , 15 , 16 , 17 , 18) |
| 5. evaluation of witness testimony and identity verification. (Para 19 , 20 , 21) |
| 6. evidential burden in cases of forgery. (Para 22 , 23 , 24) |
| 7. need for witness testimony to prove document execution. (Para 25 , 26) |
| 8. evidential value of contemporaneous actions. (Para 27 , 28) |
| 9. pleadings and evidential consistency requirements. (Para 29 , 30 , 31 , 32) |
| 10. conclusion and outcome of the appeal. (Para 33) |
Introduction
[1] In this judgment, the parties were referred to as they were designated before the trial court. This is an appeal by the defendant. The appeal arose from the decision of the Magistrate's court which found in favour of the plaintiff. The learned Magistrate allowed the plaintiff's claim with costs.
[2] The focus of this appeal concerned the question of whether the defendant's identity had been unlawfully misused to open an account with the
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
