This is a sample of our (approximately) 3 page long Relevance notes, which we sell as part of the LAWS 307 Law of Evidence Notes collection, a A- package written at University Of Canterbury in 2012 that contains (approximately) 55 pages of notes across 11 different documents.
The original file is a 'Word (Docx)' whilst this sample is a 'PDF' representation of said file. This means that the formatting here may have errors. The original document you'll receive on purchase should have more polished formatting.
The following is a plain text extract of the PDF sample above, taken from our LAWS 307 Law of Evidence Notes. This text version has had its formatting removed so pay attention to its contents alone rather than its presentation. The version you download will have its original formatting intact and so will be much prettier to look at.
2 Relevance Starting point s 7 Evidence Act 2006 (EA): 7 (1)
Fundamental principle that relevant evidence admissible All relevant evidence is admissible in a proceeding except evidence that is—
(a) inadmissible under this Act or any other Act; or (b) excluded under this Act or any other Act. Evidence that is not relevant is not admissible in a proceeding. Evidence is relevant in a proceeding if it has a tendency to prove or disprove anything that is of consequence to the determination of the proceeding.
This is a low threshold for admissibility. Relevance is a "relational concept" (Mueller and Kirkpatrick) where one fact
"renders probable the past, present or future existence or nonexistence of the
2.1 Therefore, before assessing relevance you must establish your ultimate issues Smith v The Queen: "In determining relevance, it is fundamentally important to
identify what are the issues … On a criminal trial the ultimate issues will be expressed
in terms of the elements of the offence with which the accused stands charged."
(HCA) Facts in issue are derived from the substantive law for civil and criminal law and must
have an evidential foundation. You may have subordinate or collateral facts in issue
such as the credibility of witnesses or ancillary rulings (where you must adduce some
evidence in support of a copy). One may also try to prove subsidiary facts or circumstantial evidence: facts
relevant to facts in issue. There are 3 categories:
• Preoffence conduct (prospectant evidence) - Joy v Phillips - involved a
stable boy killed in his employment with no direct witnesses. One piece of
prospectant evidence was that he was in the habit of teasing the horses. When
combined with the generalisation that this would make it more likely for a
horse to react, it was held relevant. He was also found with a halter in his
hands making it more likely he was near the horses at the time of death.
• Contemporaneous conduct (concomitant evidence) o
Woolf v Woolf
- divorce proceedings requiring proof of fault/adultery.
There was evidence that they were seen in bed together and shared a
bedroom. Held to be relevant to inferring adultery. o Res gestae evidence - the thing done. Usually something required to be
proved to make sense of a person's story.
R v Olamoe
- police arrived within minutes of domestic
violence. They found a woman with injuries to her face and got
a statement within 15 minutes. The court held this evidence to
****************************End Of Sample*****************************
Buy the full version of these notes or essay plans and more in our LAWS 307 Law of Evidence Notes.