Roos v Wang [2010] NZWHT Auckland 10 [pdf, 288 KB]
...Morrell confirms that the signatures on the producer statement and material guarantee and warranty “could be” those of Mr Kiff. That is correct so far as it goes. However, the test the claimants must meet is not “could be” but rather the civil standard of proof, namely the balance of probabilities. The claimants are also incorrect to contend that it is Mr Kiff’s responsibility to prove forgery. On the contrary, the claimants carry the burden of proof (i.e. that the d...