RELEVANCE, ADMISIBILITY AND WEIGHT OF EVIDENCE Flashcards
What is relevant evidence?
Evidence is relevant if it is logically probative in value or disprobative of some matter which requires proof i.e. evidence which tends to prove or disprove a material fact in issue.
How is relevant evidence defined in the Evidence Act- Section 51 NRCD 323?
Evidence including evidence relevant to the credibility of a witness or hearsay declarant which makes the existence of any fact that is of consequence to the determination of the action more or less probable than it would be without the evidence.
What does the definition in the Evidence Act mean?
- That evidence is relevant if it has probative value i.e. if it proves or disproves a fact in issue- Probative value test
- Evidence is relevant when it is material or has a bearing on or relates to the facts in issue (“of consequence to the determination of the action” )- Materiality test
How is the materiality of evidence established?
It is established where there is some logical connection between the evidence offered and the issue to be determined. That is evidence which has a material connection that links an accused with the offence committed.
What is admissibility?
Acceptance of the court of evidence offered by a party or witness.
Section 51(2) & (3) NRCD 323- General Rule about admissibility
(2) All relevant evidence is admissible except as otherwise provided by any enactment
(3) No evidence is admissible except relevant evidence
When would relevant evidence be excluded or inadmissible?- Section 52
Under this provision, a judge has the discretion to exclude relevant evidence if the probative value of the evidence is substantially outweighed by the following situations:
• Considerations of undue delay, waste of time or needless presentation of cumulative evidence
• Risk of admission creating substantial danger of unfair prejudice or substantial danger of confusing the issues
• In civil actions, where a stay is not possible, the risk of the admission unfairly surprising an opponent who had not had a reasonable ground to anticipate that such evidence would be offered. – applicable only to civil cases 1
Summary of the grounds on which relevant evidence may be inadmissible
- Undue delay:
- Waste of time
- Unnecessary repetition of evidence: e.g. when for instance an accident is observed by twenty or more witnesses and the party wants to all or several of them to repeat the same accident as seen by each one.
- Needless presentation of cumulative evidence
- Substantial danger of unfair prejudice
- Substantial danger of confusing the issues
- Unfair surprise to a party
When would .character evidence be admissible- Section 53 NRCD 323?
a) In a criminal action evidence of the character or a trait of the character of the accused when offered by the accused to prove his innocence or by the prosecution to rebut such evidence previously introduced by the accused
When would .character evidence be admissible- Section 53 NRCD 323?
b) In a criminal action evidence of the character or trait of the character of the victim of the alleged crime when offered by the accused to prove the conduct of the victim in connection with the alleged crime, or by the prosecution for the same purpose
When would .character evidence be admissible- Section 53 NRCD 323?
c) Evidence of the character or trait of the character of a witness or hearsay declarant when offered to support or attack his credibility
When would .character evidence be admissible- Section 53 NRCD 323?
d) Where the character or a trait of character is an essential element of a charge, claim or defence.
- Section 53(d) provides one of the occasions for admitting character evidence. That is, where the character constitutes an essential element of a charge, claim or defence and s. 54(2) repeats s. 53(d) by emphasising that the form the evidence must not be in the form of “specific instances of a person’s conduct”.
How can character be proven- Section 54 NRCD 323?
• Save as provided for in sections 83, 84 and 85 i.e. credibility, in the circumstances that evidence of a person’s character is admissible, such evidence will be in the form of an opinion or evidence of reputation.
How can character be proven- Section 54 NRCD 323?
• It cannot be in the form of specific instances of the conduct of a person’s conduct save for where the character or trait of such a person is an essential element of a charge, claim or defence e.g., while a court may be told that an accused is a known thief, specific instances of theft is not inadmissible as such instances would give rise to indeterminable issues which would have but a very remote bearing on the question in dispute.
How can character be proven- Section 54 NRCD 323?
• Regardless of the immediate point, evidence of specific instances of the person’s conduct including the commission of a crime or civil wrong, may be admissible to show such facts as motive, opportunity, intent, preparation, plan, knowledge, identity or absence mistake or accident.
