Many small businesses somehow operate through phone calls and WhatsApp, without formal purchase orders, written contracts, or company stamps on every document. A common assumption is that without this kind of paperwork, there is nothing solid to enforce if a customer refuses to pay. Malaysian law says otherwise, and understanding why matters for any business running on informal, day to day arrangements.

Under the Contracts Act 1950, a contract does not need to be in writing to be valid, unless a specific law says otherwise. What matters is whether there was an offer, an acceptance, consideration, and an intention to be bound, and these can all be shown through conduct and communication rather than a signed document. This is where electronic messages come in. Malaysian courts have recognised that text messages and WhatsApp conversations can clearly and unambiguously reflect what parties actually agreed to, and that a phone number or account can represent the identity of the person sending a message, much like a signature once did on paper. Once a party admits, or it is otherwise proven, that certain messages came from them, those messages can be treated as strong evidence of a request for work, an acknowledgment of a debt, or a promise to pay, and the law of evidence is expected to keep pace with how people actually communicate today.

The absence of a purchase order or company stamp is also not automatically fatal to a claim. If a business can show, through consistent conduct such as invoices being signed on site, accounts being sent and acknowledged, and partial payments being made, that both sides treated the arrangement as real and binding, a court can still find a valid and enforceable contract. Where a party denies liability but fails to call an available witness, such as a site supervisor, who could support that denial, courts may also draw an adverse inference against them for staying silent, since the party with better access to that evidence is expected to produce it.

If you would like to see how this was applied, you may refer to the case of Lai Yih Jing (trading as Bright Skill Machinery Work) v Precast Prosperous Sdn Bhd, Sessions Court Kuala Lumpur, Civil Suit No. WA-A52NCvC-699-09/2022.

If you wish to focus on running and growing your business, our CFO advisory team can take care of your accounting, payroll, tax planning and compliance matters for you. Feel free to WhatsApp us at 010-246 2151.