This chapter discusses the law on documentary evidence and real evidence. It addresses the following key issues: Where a party to litigation wishes to adduce in evidence a statement contained in a document, (a) should it be open to proof by production of a copy of the document and, if so, (b) in what circumstances and subject to what safeguards? Where a party to litigation wishes to admit a document in evidence, (a) should he be required to establish that it was written, signed, or attested by the person by whom it purports to be written, signed, or attested and, if so, (b) how should these matters be established? When should material objects and other types of real evidence be admissible in evidence and why do they need to be accompanied by oral testimony? When, and subject to what safeguards, should a court inspect a place or object out of court?
Chapter
This chapter discusses the admissibility of confessions under the Police and Criminal Evidence Act 1984 (the 1984 Act). It considers how, under s 76(2) of the 1984 Act, confessions may be excluded as a matter of law where obtained by oppression or in consequence of something said or done which was likely to render any such confession unreliable. It also considers the discretion to exclude confessions under s 78(1) of the 1984 Act; the effect of breaches of the Codes of Practice issued under the 1984 Act; the voir dire; statements made in the presence of the accused; and facts discovered in consequence of inadmissible confessions.
Chapter
This chapter discusses the admissibility of evidence of character. A number of factors govern the admissibility of character evidence, including whether the proceedings are civil or criminal and whether the evidence relates to the character of a party or non-party. It is also necessary to consider the nature of the character evidence in question. It may relate to either good or bad character and, in either event, may constitute evidence of a person’s actual disposition, that is his propensity to act, think, or feel in a given way; or evidence of his reputation, that is his reputed disposition or propensity to act, think, or feel in a given way. Thus, the character of a person may be proved by evidence of general disposition, by evidence of specific examples of his conduct on other occasions (including, in the case of bad conduct, evidence of his previous convictions), or by evidence of his reputation among those to whom he is known. The chapter considers civil cases in which bad character designated ‘similar fact evidence’ has been admitted
Chapter
This chapter discusses the law on experts and opinion evidence. As a general rule, opinion evidence is inadmissible: a witness may only speak of facts that he personally perceived, not of inferences drawn from those facts. However, there are two exceptions to this general rule: (i) an appropriately qualified expert may state his opinion on a matter calling for the expertise that he possesses; and (ii) a non-expert witness may state his opinion on a matter not calling for any particular expertise as a way of conveying the facts that he personally perceived. Experts may also give evidence of fact based on their expertise. The chapter covers the duties of experts and the rules which apply where parties propose to call expert evidence
Chapter
This chapter, which focuses on hearsay evidence and its relationship to confessions, first considers the rule against hearsay and its application to out-of-court statements of witnesses in civil and criminal cases. It then looks at statements, both oral and written, and gestures, as well as the admissibility of hearsay in criminal proceedings under the Criminal Justice Act (CJA) 2003 and, in outline, in civil proceedings under the Civil Evidence Act (CEA) 1995. The survival of some common law rules on hearsay is discussed. The chapter also explains the legal distinction between first-hand (what X told Y) and multiple hearsay (what X told Y who told Z). It concludes by discussing the landmark decisions under Art 6(3)(d) of the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR).
Chapter
This chapter, which focuses on opinion evidence in criminal and civil cases in the UK, explains the rule on the admissibility of opinion evidence, largely expert opinion. The notice and disclosure rules in criminal cases under the Criminal Procedure Rules (CPR) are outlined. The criteria for the admissibility of expert evidence, the responsibilities of expert witnesses, and the approach of the courts to new areas of expertise are examined in detail. It also considers the presentation of expert evidence, including the use of court-appointed experts, in civil cases under the CPR, and, finally, examines the ultimate issue rule, which has been abolished by s33(1) of the Civil Evidence Act (CEA) 1972.
Chapter
This chapter discusses the admissibility of confessions under the Police and Criminal Evidence Act 1984 (the 1984 Act). It considers how, under s 76(2) of the 1984 Act, confessions may be excluded as a matter of law where obtained by oppression or in consequence of something said or done which was likely to render any such confession unreliable. It also considers the discretion to exclude confessions under s 78(1) of the 1984 Act; the effect of breaches of the Codes of Practice issued under the 1984 Act; the voir dire; statements made in the presence of the accused; and facts discovered in consequence of inadmissible confessions.
Chapter
This chapter discusses the admissibility of evidence of character. A number of factors govern the admissibility of character evidence, including whether the proceedings are civil or criminal and whether the evidence relates to the character of a party or non-party. It is also necessary to consider the nature of the character evidence in question. It may relate to either good or bad character and, in either event, may constitute evidence of a person’s actual disposition, that is his propensity to act, think, or feel in a given way; or evidence of his reputation, that is his reputed disposition or propensity to act, think, or feel in a given way. Thus, the character of a person may be proved by evidence of general disposition, by evidence of specific examples of his conduct on other occasions (including, in the case of bad conduct, evidence of his previous convictions), or by evidence of his reputation among those to whom he is known. The chapter considers civil cases in which bad character designated ‘similar fact evidence’ has been admitted.
Chapter
This chapter discusses the law on experts and opinion evidence. As a general rule, opinion evidence is inadmissible: a witness may only speak of facts that he personally perceived, not of inferences drawn from those facts. However, there are two exceptions to this general rule: (i) an appropriately qualified expert may state his opinion on a matter calling for the expertise that he possesses; and (ii) a non-expert witness may state his opinion on a matter not calling for any particular expertise as a way of conveying the facts that he personally perceived. Experts may also give evidence of fact based on their expertise. The chapter covers the duties of experts and the rules which apply where parties propose to call expert evidence.
Chapter
This chapter discusses the law on documentary evidence and real evidence. It addresses the following key issues: Where a party to litigation wishes to adduce in evidence a statement contained in a document, (a) should it be open to proof by production of a copy of the document and, if so, (b) in what circumstances and subject to what safeguards? Where a party to litigation wishes to admit a document in evidence, (a) should he be required to establish that it was written, signed, or attested by the person by whom it purports to be written, signed, or attested and, if so, (b) how should these matters be established? When should material objects and other types of real evidence be admissible in evidence and why do they need to be accompanied by oral testimony? When, and subject to what safeguards, should a court inspect a place or object out of court?
Book
Maureen Spencer and John Spencer
Each Concentrate revision guide is packed with essential information, key cases, revision tips, exam Q&As, and more. Concentrates show you what to expect in a law exam, what examiners are looking for, and how to achieve extra marks. Evidence Concentrate is supported by extensive online resources to take your learning further. Written by experts, it covers all the key topics so you can approach your exams with confidence. The clear, succinct coverage enables you to quickly grasp the fundamental principles of this area of law and helps you succeed in exams. This guide has been rigorously reviewed and is endorsed by students and lecturers for level of coverage, accuracy, and exam advice. It is clear, concise, and easy to use, helping you get the most out of your revision. After an introduction, the book covers principles and key concepts; burden of proof; confessions and the defendant’s silence; improperly obtained evidence, other than confessions; character evidence; hearsay evidence; competence and compellability, special measures; identification evidence and questioning at trial; opinion evidence; public interest immunity; and privilege.
Chapter
This chapter examines the legal regime governing the admissibility of claims in international adjudication. Particular attention is paid to the modalities of establishing legal interest in respect of claims brought by States in their own right and on behalf of their nationals. The role of nationality is examined and the problems posed by competing claims in relation to multiple nationalities are explored. The unique nature of the problems raised in extending diplomatic protection to corporations and shareholding interests is considered in light of the jurisprudence of international tribunals. The final section considers the ambit of the rule on exhaustion of local remedies and its effect on the admissibility of claims. The parameters of the rule are explored and circumstances when, as a matter of policy, it ought to be regarded as inapplicable are discussed.
Chapter
This introductory chapter discusses the relevance of evidence in the courtroom. It first explores the development of the law of evidence beginning from the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries. The chapter then studies the extent to which the law of evidence applies to all of the different stages and matters considered by the courts and to other tribunals. The main purposes and categories of evidence are next considered and exemplified, together with the question of whether any broad general rules can usefully be elaborated. Finally, this chapter turns to its most fundamental principle — relevance, which is contrasted with the admissibility of evidence.
Chapter
Titles in the Core Text series take the reader straight to the heart of the subject, providing focused, concise, and reliable guides for students at all levels. This chapter discusses the following: what constitutes a ‘confession’ under the Police and Criminal Evidence Act 1984 (PACE), s 82(1)?; when an accused’s silence may amount to an admission at common law, whether a denial can ever amount to a ‘confession’ under PACE, s 82(1); the conditions of admissibility of confessions under PACE; confessions made by mentally handicapped persons (PACE, s 77); the admissibility of evidence discovered in consequence of an inadmissible confession; using an inadmissible confession to show that the accused speaks, writes, or expresses himself in a particular way; the status of ‘mixed statements’; an accused’s admission is not normally evidence against other co-accused; an accused’s right to use his co-accused’s confession (PACE, s 76A); admissibility of confessions by third parties.
Chapter
Titles in the Core Text series take the reader straight to the heart of the subject, providing focused, concise, and reliable guides for students at all levels. This chapter discusses the following: what constitutes a ‘confession’ under the Police and Criminal Evidence Act 1984 (PACE), s 82(1); when an accused’s silence may amount to an admission at common law, whether a denial can ever amount to a ‘confession’; the conditions of admissibility of confessions under PACE; confessions made by mentally handicapped persons (PACE, s 77); the admissibility of evidence discovered in consequence of an inadmissible confession; using an inadmissible confession to show that the accused speaks, writes, or expresses himself in a particular way; the status of ‘mixed statements’; whether one accused’s admission can ever provide evidence against a co-accused; an accused’s right to use a co-accused’s confession (PACE, s 76A); the admissibility of confessions by third parties.
Chapter
This chapter begins with an introduction to the statutory framework governing the admissibility of bad character evidence. It goes on to consider the statutory definition of ‘bad character’ and to discuss the admissibility of evidence of bad character in criminal cases under the Criminal Justice Act 2003, namely: the admissibility of the bad character of a person other than the defendant and the requirement of leave; the admissibility of evidence of the bad character of the defendant under various statutory ‘gateways’, including the gateway by which evidence may be admitted if it is relevant to an important matter in issue between the defendant and the prosecution; and safeguards including the discretion to exclude evidence of bad character and the judge’s power to stop a case where the evidence is contaminated. Procedural rules are also considered, as is the defendant’s right to challenge evidence of bad character.
Chapter
This chapter examines the circumstances in which a judgment in a civil case or a verdict in a criminal case is admissible in subsequent proceedings as evidence of the facts on which it was based. It analyses the rule in Hollington v Hewthorn & Co Ltd, which has been widely criticized, that judgments are not admissible as evidence of the facts on which they are based. Its effect, in both civil and criminal proceedings, has been largely removed by the Civil Evidence Act 1968 and the Police and Criminal Evidence Act 1984 respectively. Concerning civil proceedings, consideration is given to previous convictions generally, previous convictions in defamation proceedings, previous findings of adultery and paternity, previous acquittals, and other previous findings. Concerning criminal proceedings, consideration is given to previous convictions of the accused, previous convictions of persons other than the accused, and previous acquittals.
Chapter
This chapter introduces the principles and key concepts underlying the law of evidence, with an emphasis on criminal evidence. It reviews Article 6 of the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR), now part of English law as a result of the Human Rights Act 1998. It concludes by highlighting the importance of analysis of the relevance of the facts in a trial.
Chapter
This chapter, which focuses on hearsay evidence and its relationship to confessions, first considers the rule against hearsay and its application to out-of-court statements of witnesses in civil and criminal cases. It then looks at statements, both oral and written, and gestures, as well as the admissibility of hearsay in criminal proceedings under the Criminal Justice Act 2003 and, in outline, in civil proceedings under the Civil Evidence Act 1995. The chapter also explains the legal distinction between first-hand (what X told Y) and multiple hearsay (what X told Y who told Z), and concludes by discussing the landmark decisions under Article 6(3)(d) of the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR).
Chapter
This chapter, which focuses on the admissibility and evidential worth of character evidence, explains the definition of bad character under the Criminal Justice Act 2003. It examines how bad character evidence of the defendant may be admitted through one of the ‘gateways’ under the Act. It reviews the evidential worth of the character evidence if admitted and explains the difference between propensity and credibility. The law on the admissibility of the bad character of non-defendant witnesses is explained. The chapter concludes with the admissibility of good character evidence, governed by the common law.
