The document outlines the rules regarding opinion evidence in legal contexts, highlighting that witnesses usually cannot draw inferences but must state facts. It details the relevance of expert opinion in various fields, such as foreign law and scientific matters, as well as the criteria for establishing an expert's competence. Additionally, the document addresses how conflicting expert opinions are handled in court and the conditions under which expert testimony is deemed necessary.

1. 1
OPINION EVIDENCE (SEC 45-51)
I. INTRO
 Witnesses are generally not allowed to inform the court of the inferences they draw from
facts perceived by them, but must confine their statements to an account of such facts.
 If the witness interprets the facts which he perceives he is offering his opinion.
II. RELEVANCY OF EXPERT OPINION
A. SEC 45
1. is the exception to the general rule that the opinion of witnesses is not
relevant.
2. Expert opinion is relevant when it involves issues under
a) Foreign law
b) Science or art
c) Handwriting
d) Finger impression
3. Foreign law
Bristow v Sequville (1850)
 A person is said to be an expert in foreign law if he has practiced that foreign law in the
course of his profession for a considerable time or held any office concerning or dealing
Types (Saad Bin Mat Takraw)
expert opinion non expert

2. 2
with such foreign law.
4. Science or art
Chandra Sekaran & Ors v PP-
 the expression ‘science or art’ does not specify particular fields of knowledge does not
mean that they are not included.
 In this case the court was concerned with whether a document had been typed on a certain
typewriter. Expert evidence on this issue was allowed on the basis that ‘expert opinion on
typewriting is as much a matter of science study as handwriting and finger print evidence’.
5. Finger impression
PP v Toh Kee Huat
The evidence of fingerprint experts is said to have reached a degree of precision.
B. SECTION 46
Section 46.
Facts not otherwise relevant are relevant if they support or are inconsistent with the opinions of
experts when such opinions are relevant.

3. 3
1. support expert opinion - relevant
a) Khoo Hi Chiang v PP
In support of his evidence an expert may prove experiments, inspection and other
acts upon which his opinion is based although they were done in the absence of the
party.
2. x support – pon relevan
C. S. 60
(2) The opinion of experts expressed in any treatise commonly offered for sale and the grounds
on which such opinions are held may be proved by the production of the treatise if the author is
dead or cannot be found or has become incapable of giving evidence, or cannot be called as a
witness without an amount of delay or expense which the court regards as unreasonable.

4. 4
D. S.399 CPC
During the course of his testimony the expert may have to refer to documentary and
real evidence to support and illustrate his testimony.
Sometimes the experts will need to rely on treatises and other extrinsic materials to
support his opinion.
E. S. 51 GROUNDS OF OPINION WHEN RELEVANT
a) Dia leh substantiate opinion dia guna apa2 grounds. ground tu
relevant. Means apa2 opinion kena la ada sebab
b) PP v Yiau Swee Tung-
(1) Although an expert witness may use his knowledge and
experience to express his opinion, a bare expression of his opinion has
no evidential value at all.
c) Contoh, expert leh ckp si mati mati sbb benda tumpul bukan state
same yg bunuh
III. HOW COMPETENT MUST THE EXPERT BE?
A. JUNAIDI BIN ABDULLAH V PP
1. Academic qualification
2. Experience
3. Training
KHOO HI CHIANG V P.P. (1994) 1.M.L.J. 765 (SC) :
- The prosecution failed to prove the competence of the gov chemist as it was not shown
that he had the expertise or experience in the analysis of dangerous drugs.

5. 5
IV. CONFLICTING EXPERT EVIDENCE:
A. CHOOSE ONE
Collector of Land Revenue v Alagappa Chettiar
Where both parties to the proceedings tender expert OPINION evidence, the judge is at liberty
to choose which evidence or testimony he prefers but must nevertheless give reasons as to y he
preferred 1 expert’s opinion rather than that of other
B. THE COURT CAN CALL AN ADDITIONAL EXPERT.
C. THE COURT CAN REJECT BOTH EXPERT AND DECIDE THE CASE BASED ON OTHER
EVIDENCE AVAILABLE.
V. EXPERT OPINION IS NOT BINDING
Kulasingam v. Thambipillai (1997)
“Expert witness may give opinion evidence but the court is free to draw its own conclusions.”
VI. WHEN EXPERT OPINION IS NECESSARY?
A. WHEN THE ISSUE BEYOND THE COMMON KNOWLEDGE AND EXPERIENCE OF
JUDGE
R. v. Turner, 1975
“If on the proven facts a judge or jury can form their own conclusions without help, then the
opinion of an expert is unnecessary. In such a case if it is given dressed up in scientific jargon it
may make judgment more difficult. The fact that an expert witness had impressive qualifications

6. 6
does not by that fact alone make his opinion on matters of human nature any more helpful than
the jurors themselves; but there is a danger that they may think it does.”
VII. PROBATIVE VALUE OF EXPERT OPINION
1. corroborative nature to the facts and circumstances of the case.
2. If the expert opinion contradicts an unimpeachable eye witness or
documentary evidence then it will not have an upper hand over direct evidences.