Chapter 11: Presenting Evidence at Hearing Flashcards
4 Fundamental Principals for admissibility and weight
- Relevance
- Reliability
- Necessity
- Fairness
Relevance
The degree to which evidence provided helps answer a question the tribunal must address
5 dimensions to measure Reliability
- How to evidence was obtained (Direct observation vs Hearsay)
- What is the Witnesses Motivation
- Is it observation or opinion
- Is it direct or circumstantial
- Does other Evidence Corroborate it
Can unreliable evidence be admissible
- Unreliable evidence may be admissible, depending on necessity and fairness
- More weight is given to more reliable evidence
Can irrelevant evidence be admitted
if evidence is irrelevant or even marginally irrelevant it is inadmissible
Necessity
the greater the need for evidence the greater the chance of it being admitted
Fairness and 3 example
Some evidence may cause social or personal harm
Example:
1. Evidence that violates relationship of trust,
2. Evidence that suggest party has unfavourable characteristics,
3. Evidence obtained through unlawful or unethical means
Can unfair evidence be admitted
Yes it can be admitted granted that, the benefits of the evidence be greater than the potential harm
4 step algorithm to assessing admissibility and weight of evidence
- Is it relevant? if irrelevant its inadmissible
- Is it Reliable? If very unreliable, it is inadmissible unless necessary and fair. Weight increases with reliability
- Is it Necessary? if unnecessary, it is inadmissible
Necessity may override reliability and fairness - Is it Fair? If unfair it is admissible granted value exceeds harm
3 different types of witness examinations
- Examination in Chief
- Cross-Examination
- Re-examination
Examination in Chief
Questioning by party calling witnesses
use open ended questions
Cross-examinations
Questioning by party adverse in interest
may ask leading questions
Re-examination
Questioning by the party calling the witnesses
Used to clarify or address new issues raised in cross examination