SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Why Word and Excel Files Often Fail the Section 90A Computer-Generated Test in Malaysia

Are Word Documents and Excel Spreadsheets 'Computer-Generated' Under Malaysia's Evidence Act Section 90A?

In today's digital age, businesses and individuals frequently rely on Microsoft Word documents and Excel spreadsheets as evidence in Malaysian courts. But a common question arises: I want Malaysian case law on the Evidence Act 1950 which states that Word documents or Excel spreadsheets are not 'computer-generated' documents and do not qualify for admission under Section 90A. This query highlights a critical distinction in evidence law that can make or break a case.

Section 90A of the Evidence Act 1950 provides a statutory exception to the hearsay rule, allowing documents produced by a computer in the course of its ordinary use to be admissible as primary evidence under Section 62. However, not all digital files automatically qualify. This blog post explores the nuances, drawing from key Malaysian legal sources, to clarify when—or if—Word and Excel files meet the 'computer-generated' threshold. Note: This is general information, not legal advice. Consult a qualified lawyer for your specific situation.

Understanding Section 90A: The Gateway for Computer-Generated Evidence

Enacted in 1993, Section 90A addresses the admissibility of computer-produced documents in the electronic era. As one source notes, it constitutes a statutory exception to the common law hearsay rule, since a document produced by a computer is primary evidence: s 62 Explanation 3 of the same Act

Azlan bin Alias vs Public Prosecutor

.

Under Section 90A(1), such a document is admissible regardless of whether the person tendering it is the maker, provided it was produced in the course of its ordinary use

MYS_MARSDENLR_2019_639

MYS_MARSDENLR_2021_2237

. The focus is on the process: Was the document automatically generated by the computer system's routine operations, like bank statements or automated logs?

MYS_MARSDENLR_2016_1280

Key Requirements for Admissibility

To tender evidence under Section 90A, parties must prove compliance via:1. Certificate under Section 90A(2): Signed by a person responsible for the computer's management or operation. This can be prepared before or after production and is often described as 'nailing the coffin' as conclusive proof

MYS_MARSDENLR_2021_2237

MYS_MARSDENLR_2019_639

.2. Oral Testimony: From a witness with knowledge of the computer's operation, confirming it was in working order during the material period

MYS_MARSDENLR_2016_1280

MYS_MARSDENLR_2021_2237

.

Failure to meet these can render the document inadmissible

MYS_MARSDENLR_2016_1280

MYS_MARSDENLR_2019_2258

. Section 90A(6) ensures it prevails over other provisions, but only for qualifying documents

MYS_MARSDENLR_2016_1280

.

Do Word Documents and Excel Spreadsheets Qualify as 'Computer-Generated'?

Malaysian courts have clarified that not all digital documents are 'computer-generated' under Section 90A. Simple word-processed files or spreadsheets, often involving manual typing or data entry, typically fall short.

In a summary judgment application, the court held: 'Just because these documents were computer printouts, it did not automatically mean that they were computer-generated or documents produced by a computer encapsulated by s 90A'

YINSON CORPORATION SDN BHD vs PERFECT MIX PORTFOLIO SDN BHD & ORS - High Court Malaya Johor Bahru

. Similarly, regarding tax invoices: 'Tax invoices are not computer-generated'

POWERSTAR MACHINERY SDN BHD vs CHUAH GEOK YAN & ANOR - High Court Malaya Shah Alam

.

Courts distinguish typed input (e.g., employment contracts, manually entered spreadsheets) from computational output generated automatically in ordinary business use

QIU HANGYU vs HAI DI LAO MALAYSIA SDN BHD - High Court Malaya Kuala Lumpur

TROY INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY MALAYSIA SDN BHD vs NISSEN TECHNOLOGY SDN BHD - High Court Malaya Kuala Lumpur

BINACHUAN SDN BHD LWN. AKS SEPAKAT SDN BHD - Mahkamah Majistret Johor Bahru

. Word documents and Excel spreadsheets are generally not automatically classified as computer-generated documents under s 90A unless they meet specific criteria, including being produced in the ordinary course of computer use and accompanied by the proper certificate

PP vs UBAIDILLAH & ORS - High Court Malaya Johor Bahru

QIU HANGYU vs HAI DI LAO MALAYSIA SDN BHD - High Court Malaya Kuala Lumpur

BINACHUAN SDN BHD LWN. AKS SEPAKAT SDN BHD - Mahkamah Majistret Johor Bahru

.

For instance:- Word files: Often seen as 'typed or manipulated documents', not direct computer outputs

PP vs UBAIDILLAH & ORS - High Court Malaya Johor Bahru

BINACHUAN SDN BHD LWN. AKS SEPAKAT SDN BHD - Mahkamah Majistret Johor Bahru

GAN CHOO YONG vs PP - High Court Malaya Taiping

.- Excel spreadsheets: Unless dynamically generated (e.g., automated reports), they require proof beyond mere creation on a computer

PP vs UBAIDILLAH & ORS - High Court Malaya Johor Bahru

GAN CHOO YONG vs PP - High Court Malaya Taiping

.

The courts have consistently held that simple Word or Excel files... do not automatically qualify as computer-generated documents under s 90A, especially if they lack the requisite certification or are not produced directly from the computer's ordinary use

PP vs UBAIDILLAH & ORS - High Court Malaya Johor Bahru

BINACHUAN SDN BHD LWN. AKS SEPAKAT SDN BHD - Mahkamah Majistret Johor Bahru

GAN CHOO YONG vs PP - High Court Malaya Taiping

.

Exceptions, Limitations, and Practical Challenges

Admissibility isn't automatic even for qualifying documents. A certificate is mandatory for seamless admission, but oral testimony from a competent witness (e.g., IT manager) can suffice if they detail the system's operation

MYS_MARSDENLR_2016_1280

MYS_MARSDENLR_2019_2258

. Without this foundation, courts may exclude evidence

MYS_MARSDENLR_2019_2258

.

Other sources reinforce: Documents such as... printouts or a photograph of a conversation (not a computer printout), the document may not qualify under s 90A

PP vs UBAIDILLAH & ORS - High Court Malaya Johor Bahru

GAN CHOO YONG vs PP - High Court Malaya Taiping

PROTASCO BHD vs TEY POR YEE & ANOR AND OTHER APPEALS - Federal Court Putrajaya

. Legacy or manually altered files face similar scrutiny

Azlan bin Alias vs Public Prosecutor

.

Recommendations for Ensuring Admissibility

To maximize chances of admitting Word or Excel files:- Assess the document's nature: Is it purely manual input or automated output?

YINSON CORPORATION SDN BHD vs PERFECT MIX PORTFOLIO SDN BHD & ORS - High Court Malaya Johor Bahru

- Secure a Section 90A(2) certificate: From the responsible operator—the most straightforward method

MYS_MARSDENLR_2021_2237

.- Prepare oral testimony: Choose witnesses with direct system knowledge

MYS_MARSDENLR_2016_1280

.- Lay the foundation early: Address ordinary use and working order in affidavits or examinations.- Consider alternatives: If Section 90A doesn't apply, use Sections 61-66 for originals or copies with witness authentication.

Key Takeaways and Conclusion

While Section 90A modernizes evidence rules for the digital world, Malaysian case law draws a clear line: Word documents and Excel spreadsheets are generally not regarded as computer-generated unless produced in ordinary computer use with proper certification

PP vs UBAIDILLAH & ORS - High Court Malaya Johor Bahru

BINACHUAN SDN BHD LWN. AKS SEPAKAT SDN BHD - Mahkamah Majistret Johor Bahru

. Courts emphasize careful classification to avoid misapplication, prioritizing proof over format

YINSON CORPORATION SDN BHD vs PERFECT MIX PORTFOLIO SDN BHD & ORS - High Court Malaya Johor Bahru

POWERSTAR MACHINERY SDN BHD vs CHUAH GEOK YAN & ANOR - High Court Malaya Shah Alam

.

Parties should proactively prepare certificates or witnesses to sidestep challenges. As digital evidence proliferates, staying abreast of these distinctions is vital for litigation success.

References:-

MYS_MARSDENLR_2016_1280

MYS_MARSDENLR_2019_639

MYS_MARSDENLR_2021_2237

MYS_MARSDENLR_2019_2258

-

Azlan bin Alias vs Public Prosecutor

YINSON CORPORATION SDN BHD vs PERFECT MIX PORTFOLIO SDN BHD & ORS - High Court Malaya Johor Bahru

POWERSTAR MACHINERY SDN BHD vs CHUAH GEOK YAN & ANOR - High Court Malaya Shah Alam

PP vs UBAIDILLAH & ORS - High Court Malaya Johor Bahru

QIU HANGYU vs HAI DI LAO MALAYSIA SDN BHD - High Court Malaya Kuala Lumpur

BINACHUAN SDN BHD LWN. AKS SEPAKAT SDN BHD - Mahkamah Majistret Johor Bahru

GAN CHOO YONG vs PP - High Court Malaya Taiping

PROTASCO BHD vs TEY POR YEE & ANOR AND OTHER APPEALS - Federal Court Putrajaya

#EvidenceAct1950, #Section90A, #MalaysianLaw
Chat Download
Chat Print
Chat R ALL
Landmark
Strategy
Argument
Risk
Chat Voice Bottom Icon
Chat Sent Bottom Icon
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
whatsapp-icon Back to top