Malaysia legislation

Section 15

of EVIDENCE ACT 1950

Section 15

When there is a question whether an act was accidental or intentional or done with a particular knowledge or intention, the fact that the act formed part of series of similar occurrences, in each of which the person doing the act was concerned, is relevant.

(a)

A is accused of burning down his house in order to obtain money for which it is insured.

The facts that A lived in several houses successively, each of which he insured, in each of which a fire occurred, and after each of which fires A received payment from a different insurance office, are relevant as tending to show that the fire was not accidental.

(b)

A is employed to receive money from the debtors of B. It is A’s duty to make entries in a book showing the amounts received by him.

He makes an entry showing that on a particular occasion he received less than he really did receive.

The question is whether this false entry was accidental or intentional.

The facts that other entries made by A in the same book are false, and that the false entry is in each case in favour of A are relevant.

(c)

A is accused of fraudulently delivering to B a counterfeit ringgit.

The question is whether the delivery of the ringgit was accidental.

The facts that soon before or soon after the delivery to B, A delivered counterfeit ringgit to C, D and E are relevant as showing that the delivery to B was not accidental.

Existence of course of business when relevant