OSRAM OPTO SEMICONDUCTORS (MALAYSIA) SDN BHD v OOI MEI CHIEN @ WEI MEI CHIEN

pa-22ncvc-57-03-2020 High Court (Mahkamah Tinggi) 22 April 2025 • PA-22NCvC-57-03/2020

Catchwords

This Court needs to see whether the ID-1 has been produced in accordance with the provisions under the Evidence Act. The relevant section is Section 73A (1) EA, which states as follows: (1) Notwithstanding anything contained in this Chapter, in any civil proceedings where direct oral evidence of a fact would be admissible, any statement made by a person in a document and tending to establish that fact shall, on production of the original document, be admissible as evidence of that fact if the following conditions are satisfied: (a) if the maker of the statement either- (i) had personal knowledge of the matters dealt with by the statement; or (b) if the maker of the statement is called as a witness in the proceedings.

Judges (1)

Azizan bin Md. Arshad Delivered

Parties (2)

OSRAM OPTO SEMICONDUCTORS Sdn Bhd Plaintiff Ooi Mei Chien @ Wei Mei Chien Defendant

Judgment

Read the full judgment on the official Malaysia Courts portal.

Read on eJudgment

Source: eJudgment (pa-22ncvc-57-03-2020)