ORAL PROCEDURE 9. The plaintiff relied on the pleadings, particularly the documents annexed which were not in dispute, and called no oral evidence. For their part the defendant called four witnesses to testify largely on the manner plaintiff brought the money into their country and non- declaration thereof. CONSIDERATION BY THE COURT 10. Defendant contended that the fact that the plaintiff did not' testify himself or call witnesses to testify on his behalf amounts to a waiver of his claim as there is no substantiating evidence upon which judgment can be granted in his favour. Defendant urged the Court to dismiss the plaintiff's claim as it is unverified and unsubstantiated. With respect, this position canvassed by the defendant is not tenable at law. A plaintiff can prove his case either by relying on documents or by providing oral evidence or he could use,,a combination of both. A party is free to prove his case by any means he deems appropriate. .... .......,..... 11. At law where facts are admitted or not traversed in the pleadings, a party is not obliged to lead any further evidence. The documents on which the plaintiff relied on in this proceeding were all admitted by the defendant who also relied on all those documents as well as her own. In such an instance, it is not necessary for the plaintiff to provide oral evidence to prove these facts as they are admitted by the defendant. Thus, defendant's contention that plaintiff did not provide evidence to substantiate his claims and should be deemed to have waived them is not acceptable in law and so same is respectfully rejected by the Court. 12. The facts in this case are largely undisputed and so art; the documents relied upon by the parties. From the facts, the key issue that arises for determination is whether the plaintiff is entitled to recover his USD508,200.00 all the other issues are ancillary to this one. In determining this core issue, the Court will look at the 'II: following sub-issues. (i) Mode of transportation and declaration of the currency. 5