BRILA ENERGY LTD v. FRN (2018) LPELR-43926(CA)
PRACTICE AREA: EVIDENCE
INTRODUCTION
Since the coming into force of the Evidence Act, 2011 in which computer generated evidence became admissible, compliance with the requirement for certificate of authentication, as imposed by its section 84(4) thereof, has been one big hurdle.
According to the Act, the certificate is to, among other things, identify the document and describe the manner in which it was produced; give such particulars of any device involved in the production of that document.
The present appeal examines whether the certificate has to be tendered in evidence at all times for the relevant document(s) to be admissible in evidence.
While delivering the leading judgment, SANKEY, J.C.A., stated who can issue an authentication certificate.
According to his Lordship, “If an authentication certificate is relied on, it should show on its face that it is signed by a person who, from his job description, can confidently be expected to be in a position to give reliable evidence about the operation of the computer.”
He went further to say “From case law, this subsection [Section 84(4)]permits even non-experts to issue such a certificate, especially persons who, though not possessing the required professional qualifications may have acquired some practical knowledge and being in the position described in the subsection to bring him within the definition of an expert.”
On whether the certificate always has to be tendered, SANKEY, J.C.A. held that “where such certificate [certificate of trustworthiness of the computer used in printing the documents] is not produced, it has been held that oral evidence of a person familiar with the operation of the computer can be given of its reliability and functionality; and that such a person need not be a computer expert.”
The Honourable Justice SANKEY, J.C.A went further to hold that “There is no single approach to authentication applicable across board. Instead, the most appropriate form of authenticating electronic evidence will often depend on the nature of the evidence and the circumstances of each particular case.
However, such evidence may be authenticated by direct testimony from a witness with personal knowledge, by comparison with other authenticated evidence or by circumstantial evidence.”