ELECTRONIC SIGNATURE AND DIGITAL SIGNATURE IN MALAYSIA

What is an e-signature?

Under the Electronic Commerce Act 2006 (“ECA”), an e-signature is a signature adopted by a person in the form of any letter, character, symbol, number, sound or any of the combination which is created in an electronic form. An e-signature can replace a handwritten signature in virtually any process.

Different forms of e-signature: –

Bitmap Signature – Scanned images of handwritten signatures onto a document.
Digital Signature – A process that guarantee the authenticity of the electronic document via asymmetric cryptosystem (an algorithm or series of algorithms which provide a secure key pair).
Biometric Signature – Certified and verified signature via fingerprint, retina, iris or voice.

How is digital signature valid?

Yes. It is valid but the following conditions must be fulfilled:

The digital signature must be verified by reference to the public key listed in a valid certificate issued by a licensed certification authority;
The digital signature was affixed by the signer with the intention of signing the message; and
The recipient has no knowledge or notice that the signer has breached a duty as a subscriber and does not rightfully hold the private key used to affix the digital signature.

What is the implication of signing under the digital signature?

A message shall be as valid, enforceable and effective as if it had been written on paper if: –

It bears in its entirety a digital signature; and
That digital signature is verified by the public key listed in a certificate which was issued by a licensed certification authority and was valid at the time the digital signature was created.

What documents can be executed via e-signature?

Corporate documents and contract.

What documents cannot be executed electronically?

Powers of attorney
Wills and codicils
Trusts
Negotiable instruments

Which certification authorities in Malaysia has the license from MCMC to issue digital certificates under the DSA?

Pos Digicert Sdn Bhd (457608-K);
MSC Trustgate.Com Sdn Bhd (478231-X);
Telekom Applied Business Sdn Bhd (455343-U); and
Raffcomm Technologies Sdn Bhd (1000449-W).

Sorotan Terkini

JURISDICTION – CHOOSING THE RIGHT COURT: THE SEA JUSTICE CASE HIGHLIGHTS WHERE MARITIME DISPUTES SHOULD BE HEARD

In The Sea Justice cases [2024] 2 Lloyd’s Rep 383 and [2024] 2 Lloyd’s Rep 429, the Singapore courts tackled a key question: which country should handle a maritime dispute when incidents span international waters? After examining the location of the collision, existing limitation funds in China, and witness availability, the courts concluded that China was the more appropriate forum. This ruling highlights that courts will often defer to the jurisdiction with the closest ties to the incident, ensuring efficient and fair handling of cross-border maritime disputes. This approach is also relevant in Malaysia, where similar principles apply.

17 November ,2024 Tiada Ulasan

BREACH OF CONTRACT – FORCE MAJEURE – FORCE MAJEURE UNPACKED: WHEN ‘REASONABLE ENDEAVOURS’ DON’T BEND CONTRACT TERMS

The UK Supreme Court clarified the limits of force majeure clauses, ruling that “reasonable endeavours” do not require a party to accept alternative performance outside the agreed contract terms. This decision emphasizes that force majeure clauses are meant to uphold, not alter, original obligations – even in unexpected circumstances. The case serves as a reminder for businesses to define alternative options explicitly within their contracts if flexibility is desired.

17 November ,2024 Tiada Ulasan

NEGLIGENCE – MEDICAL NEGLIGENCE – HOSPITAL ACCOUNTABILITY REINFORCED: COURT UPHOLDS NON-DELEGABLE DUTY IN MEDICAL NEGLIGENCE

In a landmark ruling, the court reinforced the hospital’s non-delegable duty of care, holding that even when services are outsourced to independent contractors, the hospital remains accountable for patient welfare. This decision emphasizes that vulnerable patients, reliant on medical institutions, must be safeguarded against harm caused by third-party providers. The ruling ultimately rejected the hospital’s defense of independence for contracted consultants, underscoring a high standard of duty owed to patients.

17 November ,2024 Tiada Ulasan

CONTRACTS – CONTRACT FOR THE SALE OF GOODS FOB – REMOTENESS OF DAMAGES IN BACK-TO-BACK CONTRACTS – COURT DEFINES LIMITS ON LIABILITY

In a complex dispute involving back-to-back contracts, the court clarified the boundaries for assessing damages, emphasizing that a chain of contracts does not automatically ensure liability passes through. Although substantial losses resulted from delays and disruption, the court highlighted the importance of the remoteness of damages, noting that each contract’s unique terms ultimately limited liability. This decision emphasise the need for parties in chain contracts to carefully define indemnity and liability provisions, as damages are assessed based on foreseeability rather than simply the structure of linked agreements.

17 November ,2024 Tiada Ulasan

TORT – BREAKING CONFIDENTIALITY – COURT CRACKS DOWN ON INSIDER LEAKS AND CORPORATE CONSPIRACY

In a recent ruling on corporate confidentiality, the court held two former employees liable for disclosing sensitive business information to a competitor, deeming it a breach of both employment contracts and fiduciary duties. This case highlights the serious consequences of unauthorized sharing of proprietary data and reinforces that such disclosures can lead to substantial legal and financial repercussions, even for the receiving parties if they knowingly benefit from confidential information.

17 November ,2024 Tiada Ulasan

PROPERTY LAW – CLAIMING OWNERSHIP: COURT UPHOLDS LEGAL TITLE AND DISMISSES CONSTRUCTIVE TRUST IN PROPERTY DISPUTE

In a recent property dispute, the court dismissed a claim for a constructive trust over property, underscoring that such a trust requires solid evidence of unfair conduct or fraud. Without sufficient proof of ownership.

17 November ,2024 Tiada Ulasan

MY

× Hubungi Kami