[1] What danger is concealed in affidavits?

It is the exhibits which your opponent annexes or attaches to their affidavits.

When they file an affidavit against your client, they will, for example, say ‘the letter dated the 1^st of January 2020 proves that the Defendant owes the Plaintiff RM100,000.00’. Then they will attach a letter.

They will say, ‘the second exhibit proves that he made an admission of this debt in writing when he asked for permission to pay by instalments’.

[2] So how do you answer?

Obviously, when you answer the affidavit, you have to say, ‘in relation to the first exhibit, the allegation that the amount of RM100,000.00 is owed is denied’. Give your reasons.

Now, say something really important. And it is this, ‘reference to exhibit one will show that the letter is not in fact dated the 1^st of January 2020. But it is in fact, the 1^st of June 2018 when the contract had not been entered into. So, that letter does not assist the Plaintiff’.

With this, you have attacked the allegation, and the contents of the exhibit.

Most lawyers will overlook it. Judges may overlook it because they are very busy.

Sometimes we overlook these tiny details. So, when you attack an allegation in an affidavit also attack the contents of the exhibit in an affidavit that your client affirms.

If possible, you must include another letter, which conflicts with this letter to make your position clearer.

Now, let’s deal with the second exhibit, where there was an alleged admission.

You must say that ‘this is a letter dated 2017; it precedes two years before the relationship between the parties in this contract of loan or borrowing or mortgage came into being. So, the letter is of no relevance to this affidavit’.

Now you put another exhibit that attacks this.

In short, remember, there is always a concealed danger in affidavits, those are in the exhibits. You must attack the exhibits with either your own exhibit or an opposing statement that neutralises the letter.

Remember this.