LIVE CAPITAL SDN. BHD. v PIONEER CONGLOMERATE SDN. BHD.

02f-65-11-2023w Federal Court (Mahkamah Persekutuan) 4 June 2025 • 02(f)-65-11/2023(W) • 27 min read

7 cases cited (0 SG, 7 foreign)

Catchwords

Civil Proceedings -Evidence – Admissibility-Documentary Evidence – Disputed Notations-Burden of Proof – Hearsay – Exclusion of Unverified Documents-Forgery – Requirement of Pleading-Prima Facie Case – Establishment - Judicial Precedent – Stare Decisis-Sections 101 & 102 Evidence Act 1950 – Burden of Proof-Section 73A Evidence Act – Documentary Statements-Trial Procedure – Marking of Exhibits-Failure to Call Witness – Adverse Inference-Tampering – Disputed Document Authenticity-Appellate Review – Substitution of Factual Findings-Part C Documents – Strict Proof Required-Legal vs Evidential Burden – Distinction-

Practice Areas

Civil Proceedings -Evidence

Judges (3)

Abdul Rahman bin Sebli Delivered Abu Bakar bin Jais Coram Seri Vazeer Alam bin Mydin Meera Coram

Counsel (9)

Jasbeer, Nur & Lee Firm Ram Yogan Sivam Firm Aradhna Kaur Counsel Appellant Dato' Jasbeer Singh Counsel Appellant Gurdit Singh a/l Kesar Singh Counsel Respondent Khrishna Dallumah Counsel Appellant Nashvinder Singh Gill Counsel Respondent Nur Hakimah Mohamad Counsel Appellant Yong Yoong Hui Counsel Appellant

Parties (2)

LIVE CAPITAL Sdn Bhd Appellant PIONEER CONGLOMERATE Sdn Bhd Respondent

Case Significance

LIVE CAPITAL SDN. BHD. v PIONEER CONGLOMERATE SDN. BHD. is a Federal Court (Mahkamah Persekutuan) decision dated June 4, 2025 (citation: 02f-65-11-2023w). <p>Live Capital appealed against the Court of Appeal's handling of disputed documentary evidence in a loan recovery action, raising questions about burden of proof and admissibility of disputed notations on documents. The Federal Court clarified that marking a document as an exhibit does not automatically prove all its contested contents, and that the party relying on disputed notations must call the maker to prove them. The appeal was allowed and the High Court's decision was restored.</p> The panel comprised Abdul Rahman bin Sebli, Abu Bakar bin Jais and Seri Vazeer Alam bin Mydin Meera, with Abdul Rahman bin Sebli delivering the judgment.

Summary

Live Capital appealed against the Court of Appeal's handling of disputed documentary evidence in a loan recovery action, raising questions about burden of proof and admissibility of disputed notations on documents. The Federal Court clarified that marking a document as an exhibit does not automatically prove all its contested contents, and that the party relying on disputed notations must call the maker to prove them. The appeal was allowed and the High Court's decision was restored.

What was the outcome of LIVE CAPITAL SDN. BHD. v PIONEER CONGLOMERATE SDN. BHD.?

<p>Live Capital appealed against the Court of Appeal's handling of disputed documentary evidence in a loan recovery action, raising questions about bu...

Statutes Cited

Courts of Judicature Act 1964 (Cap 91)

s 96

Evidence Act

s 73A s 73A(1)

Evidence Act 1950 (Cap 56)

s 67

Cases Cited (7)

MY (7)

[1956] 1 MLJ 220 [1976] 2 MLJ 239 [1984] 1 MLJ 377 [2016] 8 MLJ 739 [2023] 4 CLJ 843 [2023] 4 MLJ 1 [2023] 5 MLJ 581