The Evidence Act, explained in three minutes
Section 116A is the quiet reason a TrustedHub record holds up in court. Here's what "approved process" really means — and why the burden of proof quietly flips in your favour.
Every organisation digitising its records eventually hits the same question: will a scanned document actually stand up in court? For a contract, a claim file, or a signed consent form, "we have a PDF" is not the same as "we can prove it's authentic." That gap is exactly what Singapore's Evidence Act was amended to close.
The relevant provision is Section 116A. In plain terms, it lets a court presume that a digital record is authentic and reliable — provided it was produced by what the law calls an "approved process." That single word, "presume," changes everything.
01What "approved process" means
An approved process is a documented, repeatable workflow for converting and storing records — with controls at every step. Chain of custody from collection to delivery. Verified capture. Quality control. Tamper-evident storage. Independent certification that the whole thing works as described.
It is not a piece of software you buy. It's a system of evidence — people, procedures, and proof — that a court can trust without re-litigating every file. The rules for what counts as an approved process are set out in the First Schedule of the Evidence (Computer Output) Regulations, which specifies how digital systems must be designed, checked, and approved.
02The three presumptions — and why neutral third parties matter
When Minister for Law K Shanmugam introduced the Evidence (Amendment) Bill in Parliament on 14 February 2012, he explained Section 116A in terms that make its commercial logic immediately clear. The Act creates three distinct presumptions, each addressing a different layer of the problem.
116A(5) — Government-approved systems: The government can make rules about how to scan and store documents digitally, including who can officially check and approve those digital systems. Any process that follows these rules is considered an "approved process."
116A(6) — Exact copy presumption: If a digital copy of a document was made using an officially approved process, the court will assume the copy is an exact match to the original — unless someone proves it's not.
The 116A(2) presumption is the one most organisations underestimate. It doesn't just matter how a document was scanned — it matters who did the scanning. A record digitised by the organisation that will later rely on it in court carries a different — and weaker — evidentiary weight than one digitised by an independent third party with no stake in the dispute.
This is why TrustedHub operates as a neutral third party custodian. We have no interest in the outcome of any dispute our clients may face. We are not engaged by either side in litigation. That independence is not just a commercial positioning — it is a legal advantage that flows directly from the statute. A record we hold is presumed genuine under S.116A(2). A record stored on your own servers carries no such presumption.
03The burden of proof, flipped
This is the part most people miss. In a dispute, authenticity is usually something the party relying on a document must establish. Section 116A reverses the default for records produced through an approved process: authenticity is presumed. You skip the burden of proof — every single time.
"Digital doesn't always mean useful. A scanned page in a folder is still just a file — until a process makes it evidence."
For regulated industries — insurance, finance, healthcare, legal — that distinction is the difference between a record you have and a record you can rely on. It's why TrustedHub has operated an Evidence Act–compliant workflow for over two decades, audited annually by an independent third party.
The practical consequence extends beyond litigation. Where records are kept electronically through an approved process, you are not required to retain the physical originals. The electronic copy substitutes for the paper. That means the boxes in your warehouse are not just expensive — they are legally unnecessary once digitised properly.
04From scan to admissible
So how does a flat scan actually become something a court will accept? The short version:
- Secure collection — custody begins the moment a document is received, logged, and tracked.
- Verified capture — high-fidelity scanning in original sequence, checked by machine and human.
- Tamper-evident storage — every record stored with an immutable audit trail.
- Neutral third party custody — records held by TrustedHub, independent of either party in any future dispute.
- Annual certification — the workflow itself is independently audited, not just the output.
// Takeaways
- Section 116A lets courts presume digital records are authentic — if made by an approved process.
- An approved process is a certified system of custody, capture, and storage — not a product.
- S.116A(2) gives an additional presumption of genuineness when records are held by a neutral third party not involved in the dispute — this is TrustedHub's structural advantage.
- S.116A(6) means a digitised copy is presumed to be an exact match to the original — the other side must prove otherwise.
- Where records are properly digitised, there is no legal requirement to keep the physical originals.
- The practical payoff: the burden of proving authenticity shifts off your shoulders — every time.
That's the Evidence Act in three minutes. The deeper you go, the more nuance there is — but the core idea is simple: trust has to be built in from the beginning, not bolted on when a dispute arrives. And the organisation best placed to provide that trust is one with no stake in the outcome.