Law of Evidence I - Hearsay Notes (Studiouseason)Studious Season
This document discusses the law on hearsay evidence in Malaysia. It defines hearsay as out-of-court statements used to prove the truth of their contents. Hearsay is generally inadmissible due to reliability issues, unless it falls under an exception. The document examines what constitutes hearsay through various cases, and exceptions where hearsay may be admissible, such as statements of unavailable witnesses or dying declarations.
The document discusses the strength of qarinah (circumstantial evidence) in Syariah court cases from the perspectives of relevance and admissibility. It states that qarinah can be ruled as relevant and admissible if presented in its strongest form by looking at each piece of evidence individually and collectively. A strong qarinah allows the court to convict those accused of hudud and qisas offenses. DNA evidence is used as an example, where it becomes relevant once corroborated by other evidence. To maintain strength, the DNA sampling process must be carefully documented. The conclusion is that qarinah is a legitimate form of evidence, and a strong qarinah can convict those accused of serious crimes
This receipt is for Muhammad Noah bin Rasyid's semi-annual property tax payment of RM96 for his condominium unit located at Unit 8A-2-10, PlatinumLake View Condominium for the period of July to December. The payment was made through Maybank on July 30th, 2020.
This document provides a summary of a Federal Court of Malaysia case involving four individuals who were convicted of murder. The key points are:
1) Circumstantial evidence showed that four victims met their deaths at the defendant's farm, including evidence that led to the discovery of human remains and personal items.
2) The trial court convicted all four defendants, but the Court of Appeal rejected some evidence. The Federal Court then analyzed various evidence and testimony in detail.
3) The Federal Court ultimately dismissed the appeals of three defendants, but allowed the appeal of the third defendant. It found some evidence to be admissible and upheld the credibility of a key witness, while also identifying errors made by the lower courts.
The plaintiff commenced a defamation suit against the defendant based on statements in three letters. The parties agreed to include the letters in Part A of the agreed bundle of documents. The Judicial Commissioner found the defendant liable and awarded damages to the plaintiff. On appeal, the Court of Appeal held that including the letters in Part A only indicated agreement on the contents, not the truth of the statements. The plaintiff was not estopped from disputing the truth. However, the damages award was reduced from RM5 million to RM50,000. The majority found the defendant liable but the quantum excessive, while the dissenting judge found the plaintiff's suit should have been dismissed.
Law of Evidence I - Hearsay Notes (Studiouseason)Studious Season
This document discusses the law on hearsay evidence in Malaysia. It defines hearsay as out-of-court statements used to prove the truth of their contents. Hearsay is generally inadmissible due to reliability issues, unless it falls under an exception. The document examines what constitutes hearsay through various cases, and exceptions where hearsay may be admissible, such as statements of unavailable witnesses or dying declarations.
The document discusses the strength of qarinah (circumstantial evidence) in Syariah court cases from the perspectives of relevance and admissibility. It states that qarinah can be ruled as relevant and admissible if presented in its strongest form by looking at each piece of evidence individually and collectively. A strong qarinah allows the court to convict those accused of hudud and qisas offenses. DNA evidence is used as an example, where it becomes relevant once corroborated by other evidence. To maintain strength, the DNA sampling process must be carefully documented. The conclusion is that qarinah is a legitimate form of evidence, and a strong qarinah can convict those accused of serious crimes
This receipt is for Muhammad Noah bin Rasyid's semi-annual property tax payment of RM96 for his condominium unit located at Unit 8A-2-10, PlatinumLake View Condominium for the period of July to December. The payment was made through Maybank on July 30th, 2020.
This document provides a summary of a Federal Court of Malaysia case involving four individuals who were convicted of murder. The key points are:
1) Circumstantial evidence showed that four victims met their deaths at the defendant's farm, including evidence that led to the discovery of human remains and personal items.
2) The trial court convicted all four defendants, but the Court of Appeal rejected some evidence. The Federal Court then analyzed various evidence and testimony in detail.
3) The Federal Court ultimately dismissed the appeals of three defendants, but allowed the appeal of the third defendant. It found some evidence to be admissible and upheld the credibility of a key witness, while also identifying errors made by the lower courts.
The plaintiff commenced a defamation suit against the defendant based on statements in three letters. The parties agreed to include the letters in Part A of the agreed bundle of documents. The Judicial Commissioner found the defendant liable and awarded damages to the plaintiff. On appeal, the Court of Appeal held that including the letters in Part A only indicated agreement on the contents, not the truth of the statements. The plaintiff was not estopped from disputing the truth. However, the damages award was reduced from RM5 million to RM50,000. The majority found the defendant liable but the quantum excessive, while the dissenting judge found the plaintiff's suit should have been dismissed.
Bil cukai taksiran untuk Muhammad Noah BinRasyid untuk unit 8A-2-10 di PlatinumLake View Condominium. Nilai taksiran RM1,920 dengan cukai tahunan RM192 yang perlu dibayar sebelum 30 Julai 2020 ke Majlis Perbandaran Seremban. Cukai taksiran lewat akan dikenakan denda.
This document summarizes a Malaysian Federal Court case involving two appellants, Lawrence Masuni and another, who were convicted of murdering Willy Tuoh. The appellants appealed their conviction and sentence, arguing that the trial judge erred in finding that the key witness, PW14, was not an accomplice and in failing to require corroboration of his testimony. The Federal Court dismissed the appeals and affirmed the conviction and sentence. It held that PW14 was not an accomplice because there was no evidence he agreed to help commit the crime. Even if he was an accessory after the fact by not reporting the crime, that alone would not make him an accomplice. The trial judge found PW14 to be a credible witness
The appellant was charged with abetting another person in the murder of her husband. She claimed trial and was found guilty by the High Court. On appeal, the Court of Appeal had to determine if the various charges laid against the appellant by the prosecution were proper. The charges against the appellant had changed multiple times due to objections from the defense and rulings from different judges. The Court of Appeal had to examine this complex procedural history to decide whether the appellant's conviction was valid.
Family Law Notes (Non-muslim) - Promise to MarryStudious Season
1) The document discusses the requirements and defenses for a valid contract to marry under family law, including consideration, capacity, age, and breach of promise.
2) It also covers the consequences of breaching a promise to marry, including general damages for emotional distress and lost prospects, as well as special damages for specific financial losses.
3) Defenses against a breach of promise claim include misrepresentation of facts, lack of a duty for full disclosure, and proof of actual moral, physical, or mental infirmity that renders the promisee unfit for marriage.
The document summarizes criminal law concepts related to assault, wrongful restraint, grievous hurt, and murder. It defines key terms like assault, grievous hurt, wrongful restraint, and culpable homicide. It also discusses related legal cases and provides punishments for various offenses under the Indian Penal Code.
International Humanitarian Law - The Usage of Agent Orange in Vietnam WarStudious Season
The document discusses the usage of Agent Orange during the Vietnam War and its impacts. It provides historical background on Agent Orange and how over 80 million litres were sprayed, destroying forests and contaminating soil. Victims suffered health issues and denial of rights. The usage sparked international outcry and the creation of new legal instruments like the ENMOD to prohibit environmental warfare techniques. Scholars argued the usage violated international law and called for stronger legal protections and accountability.
This document summarizes key aspects of defamation law in Malaysia. It discusses who can sue for defamation (corporations and companies but not governmental bodies), who can be sued (the author and publisher of defamatory words), the types of defamation (libel is written, slander is spoken), when slander becomes actionable per se (impugning chastity, professional reputation, contagious disease, crime), the elements required to establish defamation (defamatory words, reference to plaintiff, publication), and defenses to defamation (truth, public benefit, fair comment).
The document appears to be a scanned copy of a legal contract or agreement spanning multiple pages. It includes standard legal language and clauses addressing terms such as compensation, responsibilities, confidentiality, ownership of intellectual property, and dispute resolution. While the specific details are unclear due to the poor quality scan, the general nature of the document seems to be establishing an agreement between two parties for services or work to be provided.
Helmi is liable for public nuisance, private nuisance, and under strict liability for the bonfire that spread and caused damage. For public nuisance, Helmi negligently left the bonfire unattended, obstructing a highway and committing an environmental offence. For private nuisance, the bonfire smoke substantially and unreasonably interfered with the neighbor's enjoyment of their land. For strict liability, the bonfire was a dangerous thing Helmi intentionally stored that escaped and damaged the neighbor's property. Helmi can be sued by the Attorney General, local authorities, private individuals with consent, and the neighbors who suffered special damages.
Helmi lit a bonfire in his garden to burn rubbish. The smoke from the fire annoyed his neighbors and damaged a neighbor's clothes. It also obstructed the vision of a passing motorist who crashed into a lamp post as a result. Later, the fire spread and destroyed a neighbor's garden shed.
Helmi is liable for public nuisance because the smoke obstructed the motorist. He committed a criminal offence by lighting the fire without approval. Helmi is also liable for private nuisance to his neighbors due to the smoke and damage. Finally, Helmi is strictly liable under Rylands v Fletcher because the fire was a dangerous thing that escaped from his property and damaged his neighbor.
There are several types of damages that can be awarded in tort cases:
1. General damages are presumed losses such as pain/suffering, loss of future earnings, or damage to reputation from libel/slander. The amount is not fixed.
2. Special damages refer to quantifiable out-of-pocket expenses like medical bills that must be specifically pleaded.
3. Contemptuous damages may be awarded when the plaintiff does not have a strong claim or deserved what happened.
4. Nominal damages are awarded when a tort is proven but actual losses are not, or damages are shown but not quantified.
5. Exemplary damages aim to punish and deter future actions
This document summarizes a High Court ruling on an application for revision of a criminal case. The accused, a ship captain, was convicted of smuggling diesel and fined RM100,000 or six months imprisonment. He sought revision on two grounds: 1) His conviction was improper as the prosecution did not prove the seized oil was diesel. 2) Confiscation of his ship was illegal as he was just the captain, not the owner. The High Court allowed the revision in part, ordering the ship be released as confiscation required the owner be charged. However, it denied other requests, finding the conviction was valid given the accused pleaded guilty knowing the nature and consequences.
Minmetals South-East Asia Corporation Pte Ltd v Nakhoda Logistics Sdn BhdStudious Season
The plaintiff appealed against the High Court's decision that the defendant carrier was not liable for failing to deliver cargo when the original bills of lading were presented. The Court of Appeal allowed the appeal and found that the defendant carrier was liable for the following reasons: (1) delivery must be made against the original bills of lading held by the plaintiff; (2) it was not for the plaintiff to establish delays in collection or facilitate exchange of bills; (3) the carrier failed to facilitate delivery despite knowing plaintiff held the original bills; and (4) the claim was not time-barred as there was no delivery to the correct party entitled to receipt.
This document summarizes a criminal trial in Malaysia where two defendants, Suaib Thandi and another, were charged with murder under Section 302 of the Penal Code. The prosecution presented evidence that the victim was attacked with parangs (machetes) and died from slash wounds to the head. Witnesses included the victim's friend who witnessed the attack and identified the defendants. The defendants were found hiding in a house and led police to clothing and parangs used in the crime. The court must now determine if the prosecution has presented a prima facie case against the defendants based on the evidence presented.
The document summarizes key aspects of Malaysian law of evidence. It discusses the nature and sources of evidence law, including the Evidence Act 1950 and common law. It outlines the applicability of the Evidence Act and rules found in other statutes. It also classifies evidence into facts in issue, relevant facts, oral evidence, documentary evidence, and real evidence. It discusses direct evidence, hearsay, and circumstantial evidence. It covers sections of the Evidence Act on confessions, character of the accused, burden of proof, and accused/spouse as witnesses. It concludes with discussions on relevancy and admissibility of evidence.
Bil cukai taksiran untuk Muhammad Noah BinRasyid untuk unit 8A-2-10 di PlatinumLake View Condominium. Nilai taksiran RM1,920 dengan cukai tahunan RM192 yang perlu dibayar sebelum 30 Julai 2020 ke Majlis Perbandaran Seremban. Cukai taksiran lewat akan dikenakan denda.
This document summarizes a Malaysian Federal Court case involving two appellants, Lawrence Masuni and another, who were convicted of murdering Willy Tuoh. The appellants appealed their conviction and sentence, arguing that the trial judge erred in finding that the key witness, PW14, was not an accomplice and in failing to require corroboration of his testimony. The Federal Court dismissed the appeals and affirmed the conviction and sentence. It held that PW14 was not an accomplice because there was no evidence he agreed to help commit the crime. Even if he was an accessory after the fact by not reporting the crime, that alone would not make him an accomplice. The trial judge found PW14 to be a credible witness
The appellant was charged with abetting another person in the murder of her husband. She claimed trial and was found guilty by the High Court. On appeal, the Court of Appeal had to determine if the various charges laid against the appellant by the prosecution were proper. The charges against the appellant had changed multiple times due to objections from the defense and rulings from different judges. The Court of Appeal had to examine this complex procedural history to decide whether the appellant's conviction was valid.
Family Law Notes (Non-muslim) - Promise to MarryStudious Season
1) The document discusses the requirements and defenses for a valid contract to marry under family law, including consideration, capacity, age, and breach of promise.
2) It also covers the consequences of breaching a promise to marry, including general damages for emotional distress and lost prospects, as well as special damages for specific financial losses.
3) Defenses against a breach of promise claim include misrepresentation of facts, lack of a duty for full disclosure, and proof of actual moral, physical, or mental infirmity that renders the promisee unfit for marriage.
The document summarizes criminal law concepts related to assault, wrongful restraint, grievous hurt, and murder. It defines key terms like assault, grievous hurt, wrongful restraint, and culpable homicide. It also discusses related legal cases and provides punishments for various offenses under the Indian Penal Code.
International Humanitarian Law - The Usage of Agent Orange in Vietnam WarStudious Season
The document discusses the usage of Agent Orange during the Vietnam War and its impacts. It provides historical background on Agent Orange and how over 80 million litres were sprayed, destroying forests and contaminating soil. Victims suffered health issues and denial of rights. The usage sparked international outcry and the creation of new legal instruments like the ENMOD to prohibit environmental warfare techniques. Scholars argued the usage violated international law and called for stronger legal protections and accountability.
This document summarizes key aspects of defamation law in Malaysia. It discusses who can sue for defamation (corporations and companies but not governmental bodies), who can be sued (the author and publisher of defamatory words), the types of defamation (libel is written, slander is spoken), when slander becomes actionable per se (impugning chastity, professional reputation, contagious disease, crime), the elements required to establish defamation (defamatory words, reference to plaintiff, publication), and defenses to defamation (truth, public benefit, fair comment).
The document appears to be a scanned copy of a legal contract or agreement spanning multiple pages. It includes standard legal language and clauses addressing terms such as compensation, responsibilities, confidentiality, ownership of intellectual property, and dispute resolution. While the specific details are unclear due to the poor quality scan, the general nature of the document seems to be establishing an agreement between two parties for services or work to be provided.
Helmi is liable for public nuisance, private nuisance, and under strict liability for the bonfire that spread and caused damage. For public nuisance, Helmi negligently left the bonfire unattended, obstructing a highway and committing an environmental offence. For private nuisance, the bonfire smoke substantially and unreasonably interfered with the neighbor's enjoyment of their land. For strict liability, the bonfire was a dangerous thing Helmi intentionally stored that escaped and damaged the neighbor's property. Helmi can be sued by the Attorney General, local authorities, private individuals with consent, and the neighbors who suffered special damages.
Helmi lit a bonfire in his garden to burn rubbish. The smoke from the fire annoyed his neighbors and damaged a neighbor's clothes. It also obstructed the vision of a passing motorist who crashed into a lamp post as a result. Later, the fire spread and destroyed a neighbor's garden shed.
Helmi is liable for public nuisance because the smoke obstructed the motorist. He committed a criminal offence by lighting the fire without approval. Helmi is also liable for private nuisance to his neighbors due to the smoke and damage. Finally, Helmi is strictly liable under Rylands v Fletcher because the fire was a dangerous thing that escaped from his property and damaged his neighbor.
There are several types of damages that can be awarded in tort cases:
1. General damages are presumed losses such as pain/suffering, loss of future earnings, or damage to reputation from libel/slander. The amount is not fixed.
2. Special damages refer to quantifiable out-of-pocket expenses like medical bills that must be specifically pleaded.
3. Contemptuous damages may be awarded when the plaintiff does not have a strong claim or deserved what happened.
4. Nominal damages are awarded when a tort is proven but actual losses are not, or damages are shown but not quantified.
5. Exemplary damages aim to punish and deter future actions
This document summarizes a High Court ruling on an application for revision of a criminal case. The accused, a ship captain, was convicted of smuggling diesel and fined RM100,000 or six months imprisonment. He sought revision on two grounds: 1) His conviction was improper as the prosecution did not prove the seized oil was diesel. 2) Confiscation of his ship was illegal as he was just the captain, not the owner. The High Court allowed the revision in part, ordering the ship be released as confiscation required the owner be charged. However, it denied other requests, finding the conviction was valid given the accused pleaded guilty knowing the nature and consequences.
Minmetals South-East Asia Corporation Pte Ltd v Nakhoda Logistics Sdn BhdStudious Season
The plaintiff appealed against the High Court's decision that the defendant carrier was not liable for failing to deliver cargo when the original bills of lading were presented. The Court of Appeal allowed the appeal and found that the defendant carrier was liable for the following reasons: (1) delivery must be made against the original bills of lading held by the plaintiff; (2) it was not for the plaintiff to establish delays in collection or facilitate exchange of bills; (3) the carrier failed to facilitate delivery despite knowing plaintiff held the original bills; and (4) the claim was not time-barred as there was no delivery to the correct party entitled to receipt.
This document summarizes a criminal trial in Malaysia where two defendants, Suaib Thandi and another, were charged with murder under Section 302 of the Penal Code. The prosecution presented evidence that the victim was attacked with parangs (machetes) and died from slash wounds to the head. Witnesses included the victim's friend who witnessed the attack and identified the defendants. The defendants were found hiding in a house and led police to clothing and parangs used in the crime. The court must now determine if the prosecution has presented a prima facie case against the defendants based on the evidence presented.
The document summarizes key aspects of Malaysian law of evidence. It discusses the nature and sources of evidence law, including the Evidence Act 1950 and common law. It outlines the applicability of the Evidence Act and rules found in other statutes. It also classifies evidence into facts in issue, relevant facts, oral evidence, documentary evidence, and real evidence. It discusses direct evidence, hearsay, and circumstantial evidence. It covers sections of the Evidence Act on confessions, character of the accused, burden of proof, and accused/spouse as witnesses. It concludes with discussions on relevancy and admissibility of evidence.