Evidence Act 1950 · Updated to 1 Nov 2017 · Chapter II
47. Opinion as to handwriting when relevant
Feedback & supportWhen the court has to form an opinion as to the person by whom any document was written or signed, the opinion of any person acquainted with the handwriting of the person by whom it is supposed to have been written or signed, that it was or was not written or signed by that person, is a relevant fact.
court
“court” means a court established by or under Part IX of the Federal Constitution and includes— (a) a Judge; (b) a Sessions Court Judge; (c) a Magistrate; and (d) except an arbitrator, every person legally authorized to take evidence;
Explanation—A person is said to be acquainted with the handwriting of another person when he has seen that person write, or when he has received documents purporting to be written by that person in answer to documents written by himself or under his authority and addressed to that person, or when, in the ordinary course of business, documents purporting to be written by that person have been habitually submitted to him.
The question is whether a given letter is in the handwriting of A, a merchant in London.
B is a merchant in Kuala Lumpur, who has written letters addressed to
A and received letters purporting to be written by him. C is B’s clerk, whose duty it was to examine and file B’s correspondence. D is B’s broker, to whom B habitually submitted the letters purporting to be written by A for the purpose of advising him thereon.
The opinions of B, C and D on the question whether the letter is in the handwriting of A are relevant, though neither B, C nor D ever saw A write.