Adducing evidence at civil trial Flashcards Preview

Evidence > Adducing evidence at civil trial > Flashcards

Flashcards in Adducing evidence at civil trial Deck (16)
Loading flashcards...

What shouldn't you do in examination in chief?

Ask leading questions


Where a witness fails to come up to proof, an advocate may treat him as a hostile witness. True or false?



What is the test for a hostile witness?

A witness who is "not desirous of telling the truth the Court".


What is the rule about consistent statements?

The general rule is that previous consistent statements are not admissible.


What are the three exceptions to the rule about previous consistent statements?

1. Statements rebutting an allegation of recent fabrication
2. Refreshing memory
3. Statements admissible with the permission of the Court.


If giving evidence in chief orally, what are the two conditions that must be met before a witness can refresh their memory?

1. The document was made contemporaneously
2. The document must be produced for inspection by the Court and opposing parties


Will any document which refreshes a witness' memory be entered into evidence?

No - it is the testimony of the witness not the memory refreshing document.


Can witnesses read their witness statements before they give evidence (out of the box)?

Yes. No permission is needed.


What is the rule of finality?

Answers given in cross examination on purely collateral matters may not be contradicted by rebuttal evidence.


How does the rule of finality apply to credibility?

Questions that merely go to the credibility of the witness but are otherwise irrelevant may not be rebutted.


What are the three main exceptions to the rule against finality?

1. Bias
2. Previous convictions
3. To prove a mental disability affecting the evidence


Can spent convictions be put to a witness?

Generally spent convictions cannot be put to witnesses.


Evidence is admissible to contradict a witness' denial of partiality or bias. True or false?



What is the rule on previous inconsistent statements for cross examination?

If previous inconsistent statements are relevant to the subject matter of the proceedings they can be admitted.


What is the XX step process for adducing previous inconsistent statement evidence?

1. Show the witness a statement
2. Ask the witness to read it
3. Ask if the witness stands by the contents of the statement
4. In civil cases the document will be admissible as truth of its contents if the witness stands by the oral testimony.


When can a party adduce evidence of their good character?

1. When it is a matter in issue
2. When it is relevant to a matter in issue (but this will almost never happen)