Discuss ways which can be used to prove execution of a document in court.
Execution refers to the process of proving that the signature and/ or handwriting In the
document are genuine.1 However, proving the genuineness of a document does not amount
to proof of truthfulness of contents.2
General rule in both criminal and civil proceedings is that a document will only be admitted
in evidence on proof of due execution. However, an exception exists in the case of public
documents since most of them provide for proof of contents by secondary evidence and
also exempt from proof of due execution. For private documents, proof of due execution
involves proof of handwriting and signature, proof of attestation and may also be admitted
or presumed. In addition to that, documents in some cases need to be stamped for stamp
duty purposes.
In proving due execution of a private document, one has to show that it was actually written
or signed by the person in question. For these reasons, direct oral evidence that the
signatory signed in a particular name may be given by the signatory himself or by any other
person who witnessed the signatory of the document sign it. Proof may also be effected by
admissible hearsay assertion to the same effect that the signatory actually signed the
document being disputed upon. Handwriting or signature can be proved by comparing the
document in question (disputed document) with another document (specimen document)
which was proved to have been written by the same person in question. This method does
not only apply to civil but also to criminal proceedings. However, in criminal proceedings, a
proof beyond reasonable doubt is key for the genuineness of the specimen handwriting. 3 In
the case of R v Ewing,4 the admissibility of a handwriting comparison depended upon the
control sample being ‘proved to the satisfaction of the judge to be genuine.’ In this case it
was held that this meant that the judge had to apply the criminal standard of proof to the
question.
Comparison of the specimen and the disputed handwriting can be carried out by evidence
of somebody who is not necessarily an expert in that area but is familiar with the
handwriting in question,5 or by opinion evidence of an expert in handwriting regardless of
how they acquired the skill.6 However, in criminal matters, an expert needs to be called
upon and point out both the similarities and differences between the disputed and the
specimen documents and thereafter leave it to the jury to draw their conclusions from the
1
__https://lawcorner.in/ how-to-prove-documents-in-court/ (13 th February 2023).
2
ibid
3
R v Ewing [1983] 2 All ER 645, CA (Ch 4).
4
ibid
5
Fitzwalter Peerage Claim (1844) 10 Cl&Fin 193, HL.
6
R v Silverlock [1894] 2 QB 766.
Execution refers to the process of proving that the signature and/ or handwriting In the
document are genuine.1 However, proving the genuineness of a document does not amount
to proof of truthfulness of contents.2
General rule in both criminal and civil proceedings is that a document will only be admitted
in evidence on proof of due execution. However, an exception exists in the case of public
documents since most of them provide for proof of contents by secondary evidence and
also exempt from proof of due execution. For private documents, proof of due execution
involves proof of handwriting and signature, proof of attestation and may also be admitted
or presumed. In addition to that, documents in some cases need to be stamped for stamp
duty purposes.
In proving due execution of a private document, one has to show that it was actually written
or signed by the person in question. For these reasons, direct oral evidence that the
signatory signed in a particular name may be given by the signatory himself or by any other
person who witnessed the signatory of the document sign it. Proof may also be effected by
admissible hearsay assertion to the same effect that the signatory actually signed the
document being disputed upon. Handwriting or signature can be proved by comparing the
document in question (disputed document) with another document (specimen document)
which was proved to have been written by the same person in question. This method does
not only apply to civil but also to criminal proceedings. However, in criminal proceedings, a
proof beyond reasonable doubt is key for the genuineness of the specimen handwriting. 3 In
the case of R v Ewing,4 the admissibility of a handwriting comparison depended upon the
control sample being ‘proved to the satisfaction of the judge to be genuine.’ In this case it
was held that this meant that the judge had to apply the criminal standard of proof to the
question.
Comparison of the specimen and the disputed handwriting can be carried out by evidence
of somebody who is not necessarily an expert in that area but is familiar with the
handwriting in question,5 or by opinion evidence of an expert in handwriting regardless of
how they acquired the skill.6 However, in criminal matters, an expert needs to be called
upon and point out both the similarities and differences between the disputed and the
specimen documents and thereafter leave it to the jury to draw their conclusions from the
1
__https://lawcorner.in/ how-to-prove-documents-in-court/ (13 th February 2023).
2
ibid
3
R v Ewing [1983] 2 All ER 645, CA (Ch 4).
4
ibid
5
Fitzwalter Peerage Claim (1844) 10 Cl&Fin 193, HL.
6
R v Silverlock [1894] 2 QB 766.
