Evidence

Question 1

Define: Evidence

Answer 1

“Evidence” is the term for the whole body of material which a court or tribunal – ie in criminal cases the Judge or jury – may take into account in reaching their decision.

Evidence may be in oral, written or visual form.

Question 2

Define: Admissible evidence

Answer 2

Evidence is admissible if it is legally able to be received by a court.

Question 3

Define: Relevance

Answer 3

Evidence is relevant “if it has a tendency to prove or disprove anything that is of consequence to the determination of a proceeding” (s7(3)of the Evidence Act 2006).

Question 4

Define: Facts in issue

Answer 4

Facts in issue are those which:
• the prosecution must prove to establish the elements of the offence, or
• the defendant must prove to succeed with a defence, in respect of which he or she carries the burden of proof.

Question 5

Define: Exclusionary rules

Answer 5

These are rules that exclude evidence (usually because it is unreliable, unduly prejudicial or otherwise unfair to admit it).

Question 6

Define: Weight of evidence

Answer 6

The “weight” of evidence is its value in relation to the facts in issue. The value will depend on a wide range of factors, such as:
• the extent to which, if accepted, it is directly relevant to or conclusive of, those facts
• the extent to which it is supported or contradicted by other evidence produced
• the veracity of the witness.
The “weight” is the degree of probative force that can be accorded to the evidence.

Question 7

Define: Offer Evidence

Answer 7

Evidence must be elicited before it is “offered”: Merely putting a proposition to a witness is not offering evidence; it becomes so when the witness accepts the proposition – s96(1) of the Evidence Act 2006.

Offering evidence in the Evidence Act 2006 includes eliciting evidence by cross-examination of a witness called by another party.

Question 8

Define: Give Evidence

Answer 8

“Giving evidence” is included in “offering evidence”: a witness “gives evidence”; a party “offers evidence”. A party who testifies both gives and offers evidence.

Question 9

Define Incriminate

Answer 9

To incriminate is to provide information that is reasonably likely to lead to, or increase the likelihood of, the prosecution of a person for a criminal offence.

Question 10

Define: Proceeding

Answer 10

This means a proceeding conducted by a court, and any application to a court connected with a proceeding.

Question 11

Define: Statement

Answer 11

This is a spoken or written assertion by a person, or non-verbal conduct of a person intended by that person as an assertion of any matter.

Question 12

Define: Witness

Answer 12

This is a person who gives evidence and is able to be cross-examined in a proceeding.

Question 13

Define: Hearsay statement

Answer 13

This is a statement that was made by a person other than a witness, and is offered in evidence in the proceeding to prove the truth of its contents.

Question 14

Define: Veracity

Answer 14

This is the disposition of a person to refrain from lying, whether generally or in a proceeding.

Question 15

Define: Propensity

Answer 15

Propensity evidence is evidence about a person’s propensity to act in a particular way or have a particular state of mind, and includes evidence of acts, omissions, events or circumstances with which a person is alleged to have been involved.

Question 16

Define: Direct evidence

Answer 16

This is any evidence given by a witness as to a fact in issue that he or she has seen, heard or otherwise experienced (e.g. an eyewitness who states that she saw the defendant stab the complainant with a knife).

Question 17

Define: Circumstantial evidence

Answer 17

This is evidence of circumstances that do not directly prove any fact in issue, but which allow inferences about the existence of those facts to be drawn (e.g. the defendant was seen in the vicinity of the scene of the crime).

Question 18

Define: Enforcement agency

Answer 18

This refers to the New Zealand Police or any body or organisation that has a statutory responsibility for the enforcement of an enactment, including the New Zealand Customs Service, the Ministry of Fisheries and the Inland Revenue Department.

Question 19

What is the Woolmington Principle?

Answer 19

subject to specific statutory exceptions, the burden of proof lies clearly with the prosecution in relation to all of the elements of the offence.

Question 20

Name one exception to the Woolmington principle

Answer 20

s202A(4)(b) Crimes Act 1961: Possession of an Offensive Weapon shifts the burden of proof to the defendant in regard to the intent.

Question 21

What does R v Wanhalla say about proof beyond reasonable doubt?

Answer 21

Proof beyond reasonable doubt is a very high standard of proof which the Crown will have met only if, at the end of the case, you are sure that the accused is guilty.

reasonable doubt is an honest and reasonable uncertainty left in your mind about the guilt of the accused after you have given careful and impartial consideration to all of the evidence.

Question 22

Define: Balance of probabilities

Answer 22

Balance of probabilities is the standard of proof required for the defence to prove a particular element of its case. It means it must carry a reasonable degree of probability, but not so high as is required in a criminal case. If the evidence is such that the tribunal can say: “We think it more probable than not”, the burden is discharged; if the probabilities are equal, the burden is not discharged.

Question 23

What are the six purposes of the Evidence Act 2006?

Answer 23

(a) providing for facts to be established by the application of logical rules;
(b) providing rules of evidence that recognise the importance of the rights affirmed by the New Zealand Bill of Rights Act 1990;
(c) promoting fairness to parties and witnesses; and
(d) protecting rights of confidentiality and other important public interests;
(e) avoiding unjustifiable expense and delay; and
(f) enhancing access to the law of evidence.

Question 24

Define: Facts in issue

Answer 24

The facts which in law need to be proven to succeed with the case. In criminal cases, the facts in issue are usually those which are alleged by the charging document and denied by a plea of not guilty.

Question 25

Define: Facts relevant to the facts in issue

Answer 25

Facts relevant to the facts in issue tend to prove or disprove a fact in issue.

Question 26

What is the section 7 test for relevance?

include the definition of relevance evidence

Answer 26

(1) 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.

(2) Evidence that is not relevant is not admissible in a proceeding.
(3) 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.

Question 27

List the two exceptions to the rule that evidence must be produced in support of a fact.

Answer 27

1. Where judicial notice is taken.

2. The facts are formally admitted.

Question 28

What are uncontroverted facts under s128 EA06?

Answer 28

Facts so known and accepted either generally or in the locality in which the proceeding is being held that they cannot reasonably be questioned.

Question 29

What does s129 EA06 say about admission of reliable published documents?

Answer 29

A Judge may, in matters of public history, literature, science or art, admit as evidence any published documents that the Judge considers to be reliable sources of information on the subjects to which they respectively relate.

Question 30

Define: Presumption of law and list the two categories.

Answer 30

Presumptions of law are inferences that have been expressly drawn by law from particular facts. (e.g. innocent until proven guilty)

They may be rebuttable or conclusive.

Question 31

Define: Presumption of Fact

Answer 31

Where no direct evidence is offered or is obtainable, disputed facts are sometimes inferred from other facts which are themselves proved or known.

Question 32

What is the s8 EA06 test?

Answer 32

8 General exclusion

(1) In any proceeding, the Judge must exclude evidence if its probative value is outweighed by the risk that the evidence will—
(a) have an unfairly prejudicial effect on the proceeding; or
(b) needlessly prolong the proceeding.
(2) In determining whether the probative value of evidence is outweighed by the risk that the evidence will have an unfairly prejudicial effect on a criminal proceeding, the Judge must take into account the right of the defendant to offer an effective defence.

The s8 test involves balancing the probative value of evidence against the risk that it will:
• have an “unfairly prejudicial effect on the proceeding” (s8(1)(a)), or
• “needlessly prolong the proceeding” (s8(1)(b)).

Question 33

Define: Voir Dire

Answer 33

hearing where evidence given by a witness to prove the facts necessary for deciding whether some other evidence should be admitted in a proceeding.

Question 34

Define: Preliminary Evidence (with reference to s14 EA06)

Answer 34

where a question arises concerning the admissibility of any evidence, the judge may admit the evidence, subject to further evidence being offered later which establishes its admissibility.

Question 35

What are the exclusionary rules of evidence?

Answer 35

things that cannot be given in evidence.
The exclusive rules of evidence deal with:
• veracity
• propensity
• hearsay
• opinion
• identification
• improperly obtained evidence.

Question 36

What is the general rule regarding veracity?

Answer 36

37 Veracity rules
(1) A party may not offer evidence in a civil or criminal proceeding about a person’s veracity unless the evidence is substantially helpful in assessing that person’s veracity.

Question 37

When can the prosecution offer evidence of the defendant’s veracity?

Answer 37

Sec 38

(2) The prosecution in a criminal proceeding may offer evidence about a defendant’s veracity only if -
(a) the defendant has offered evidence about his or her veracity or has challenged the veracity of a prosecution witness by reference other than the facts in issue; and
(b) the Judge permits the prosecution to do so.

• the prosecution must show that veracity is relevant – permission for the prosecution to offer evidence about the veracity of a defendant will only be granted if the defendant’s veracity is in issue.
• the defendant has offered evidence about his or her veracity (by testifying or questioning witnesses) or has challenged the veracity of a prosecution witness by reference to matters other than the facts in issue (the defendant must be responsible for the evidence – i.e. must have orchestrated it);
• the proposed evidence must meet the substantial helpfulness test.
• The prosecution must get permission from the judge to offer the evidence.

Question 38

When can the prosecution offer propensity evidence about the defendants?

Answer 38

43 Propensity evidence offered by prosecution about defendants
(1) The prosecution may offer propensity evidence about a defendant in a criminal proceeding only if the evidence has a probative value in relation to an issue in dispute in the proceeding which outweighs the risk that the evidence may have an unfairly prejudicial effect on the defendant.

Question 39

What factors MAY the judge consider when making a determination whether to allow propensity evidence about a defendant?

Answer 39

a) the frequency with which the acts, omissions, events, or circumstances which are the subject of the evidence have occurred:
(b) the connection in time between the acts, omissions, events, or circumstances which are the subject of the evidence and the acts, omissions, events, or circumstances which constitute the offence for which the defendant is being tried:
(c) the extent of the similarity between the acts, omissions, events, or circumstances which are the subject of the evidence and the acts, omissions, events, or circumstances which constitute the offence for which the defendant is being tried:
(d) the number of persons making allegations against the defendant that are the same as, or are similar to, the subject of the offence for which the defendant is being tried:
(e) whether the allegations described in paragraph (d) may be the result of collusion or suggestibility:
(f) the extent to which the acts, omissions, events, or circumstances which are the subject of the evidence and the acts, omissions, events, or circumstances which constitute the offence for which the defendant is being tried are unusual.

Question 40

What is the test for allowing propensity evidence?

Answer 40

The test for admissibility under s43 is whether the evidence has a probative value in relation to an issue in dispute in the proceeding which outweighs the risk that the evidence may have an unfairly prejudicial effect on the defendant.

Question 41

What is the general rule regarding hearsay?

Answer 41

17 Hearsay rule

(1) A hearsay statement is not admissible except—
(a) as provided by this subpart or by the provisions of any other Act; or
(b) in cases where—
(i) this Act provides that this subpart does not apply; and
(ii) the hearsay statement is relevant and not otherwise inadmissible under this Act.

Question 42

When can hearsay statements be admissible?

Answer 42

18 General admissibility of hearsay

(1) A hearsay statement is admissible in any proceeding if—
(a) the circumstances relating to the statement provide reasonable assurance that the statement is reliable; and
(b) either—
(i) the maker of the statement is unavailable as a witness; or
(ii) the Judge considers that undue expense or delay would be caused if the maker of the statement were required to be a witness.
(2) This section is subject to sections 20 and 22.

Question 43

Under section 16(1) Evidence Act 2006 what circumstance will a judge consider when making a decision about the reliability of a hearsay statement?

Answer 43

(a) the nature of the statement; and
(b) the contents of the statement; and
(c) the circumstances that relate to the making of the statement; and
(d) any circumstances that relate to the veracity of the person; and
(e) any circumstances that relate to the accuracy of the observation of the person

Question 44

Under s16(2) what is meant by ‘unavailable as a witness’ in respect of hearsay evidence?

Answer 44

(a) is dead; or
(b) is outside New Zealand and it is not reasonably practicable for him or her to be a witness; or
(c) is unfit to be a witness because of age or physical or mental condition; or
(d) cannot with reasonable diligence be identified or found; or
(e) is not compellable to give evidence.

Question 45

What is the general rule regarding opinion evidence?

Answer 45

23 Opinion rule

A statement of an opinion is not admissible in a proceeding, except as provided by section 24 or 25.

Question 46

What does section 24 say about the admissibility of opinion evidence?

Answer 46

In order to be admissible under s24, the statement of opinion must fulfil two basic criteria:
• opinion must be the only way in which to effectively communicate the information to the finder of fact,
• the witness must be stating an opinion (be it conclusion, inference etc) from something personally perceived.

Question 47

What does section 25 say about the admissibility of opinion evidence?

Answer 47

If the evidence is opinion evidence, then in order to comply with s25, the opinion must
• be that of an “expert”
• comprise “expert evidence”, and
• offer substantial help to the fact-finder in understanding other evidence or ascertaining any fact in the proceeding.

Question 48

Define: Expert witness

Answer 48

a person who has specialised knowledge or skill based on training, study or experience

Question 49

What does R v Hutton say about the conduct of expert witnesses?

Answer 49

• an expert must state his or her qualifications when giving evidence
• the facts, matters and assumptions on which opinions are expressed must be stated explicitly
• the reasons for opinions given must be stated explicitly
• any literature or other material used or relied on to support opinions must be referred to by the expert
• the expert must not give opinion evidence outside his or her area of expertise
• if an expert witness believes that his or her evidence might be incomplete or inaccurate without some qualification, that qualification must be stated
• an expert has an overriding duty to assist the Court impartially on relevant matters within the expert’s area of expertise, and
• an expert is not an advocate for any party.

Question 50

Under section 71 who is eligible and compellable to give evidence in a proceeding?

Answer 50

In a civil or criminal proceeding, -

(a) any person is eligible to give evidence; and
(b) a person who is eligible to give evidence is compellable to give that evidence.

Question 51

Who is not compellable to give evidence in a proceeding?

Answer 51

the Sovereign, Governor-General, and Sovereign or Head of State of a foreign country, are not compellable to give evidence.

Question 52

Outline the types of communication that may be subject to privilege

Answer 52

• communications with legal advisors – section 54
• solicitors’ trust accounts – section 55
• preparatory materials for proceedings – section 56
• settlement negotiations or mediation – section 57
• communications with ministers of religion – section 58
• information obtained by medical practitioners and clinical psychologists – section 59.

Question 53

What is the rule regarding the privilege against self-incrimination?

Answer 53

Section 60(2)(a) provides that, where the privilege applies, the privilege holder cannot be compelled to provide information that legal rules would otherwise require him or her to supply.

the information would, if so provided, be likely to incriminate the person under New Zealand law for an offence punishable by a fine or imprisonment.

Question 54

What information is subject to confidentiality?

Answer 54

• Jury deliberations

- Protection of journalists’ sources

Question 55

What does s69 say about the disclosure of confidential information?

Answer 55

(1) A direction under this section is a direction that any 1 or more of the following not be disclosed in a proceeding:
(a) a confidential communication:
(b) any confidential information:
(c) any information that would or might reveal a confidential source of information.

Section 69 allows the judge to prevent disclosure of confidential information after weighing up various factors to determine if the public interest justifies protection of the material.

Question 56

Define: Corroboration

Answer 56

It is independent evidence that tends to confirm or support some fact of which other evidence is given and implicates the defendant in the crime charged.

Question 57

Which offences require corroborating evidence?

Answer 57

perjury and related offences (ss 108, 110 and 111 Crimes Act) and treason (s73 Crimes Act)

Question 58

What is the Judge’s role in a jury trial?

Answer 58

• decide all questions concerning the admissibility of evidence
• explain and enforce the general principles of law applying to the point at issue
• instruct the jury on the rules of law by which the evidence is to be weighed once it has been submitted.

Question 59

What is the sequence of a jury trial?

Answer 59

− the jury is empanelled and a foreperson selected
− the prosecution gives their opening address
− the prosecution case is presented
− the defence gives their opening address (although the defence may make an address after the prosecution opening)
− the defence case is presented (if they choose to call any witnesses)
− the prosecution makes their closing statement
− the defence makes their closing statement
− the judge sums up
− the jury retires to decide the verdict.

Question 60

Instead of making an oath or affirmation, what is the process with witnesses under 12?

Answer 60

• be informed by the judge of the importance of telling the truth and not telling lies, and
• after being given that information, make a promise to tell the truth, before giving evidence.

Question 61

What does s33 say about the defendant’s right to silence?

Answer 61

(33) Restrictions on comment on defendant’s right of silence at trial:
In a criminal proceeding, no person other than the defendant or the defendant’s counsel or the Judge may comment on the fact that the defendant did not give evidence at his or her trial.

Question 62

Define: Leading question

Answer 62

One that directly or indirectly suggests a particular answer to the question (s4).

Question 63

Why can leading questions be dangerous?

Answer 63

• There is a natural tendency for people to agree with suggestions put to them
• Counsel asking leading questions of their own witnesses can more easily elicit the answers which they wish to receive
• There is a danger that leading questions will result in the manipulation or construction of the evidence through collusion, conscious or otherwise, between counsel and the witness.

Question 64

Under section 89, when are leading questions allowed in evidence in chief?

Answer 64

(1) In any proceeding, a leading question must not be put to a witness in examination in chief or re-examination unless—
(a) the question relates to introductory or undisputed matters; or
(b) the question is put with the consent of all other parties; or
(c) the Judge, in exercise of the Judge’s discretion, allows the question.
(2) Subsection (1) does not prevent a Judge, if permitted by rules of court, from allowing a written statement or report of a witness to be tendered or treated as the evidence in chief of that person.

Question 65

Circumstances where leading questions may be allowed:

Answer 65

• To direct the witness’s attention to the subject of identification evidence
• In respect of questions about surrounding circumstances in order to jog a witness’s memory
• To assist counsel in eliciting the evidence in chief of very young people, people who have difficulty speaking English, and people who are of limited intelligence.
• Where the witness has been declared hostile.

Question 66

When can a witness refer to a document in court to refresh their memory?

Answer 66

• the leave of the judge must be obtained
• the document must be shown to every other party in the proceeding
• s90(5) requires the document to have been “made or adopted” by a witness “at a time when his or her memory was fresh”.
• The document must have been made by the witness, or by another person acting on the witness’s behalf

Question 67

What is the general rule in s35 about previous consistent statements?

Answer 67

The general rule is that a witness cannot give evidence about statements made before the trial that are consistent with the evidence given at the trial unless the exceptions contained in s35(2) apply.

35(2)

(2) A previous statement of a witness that is consistent with the witness’s evidence is admissible if the statement—
(a) responds to a challenge that will be or has been made to the witness’s veracity or accuracy, based on a previous inconsistent statement of the witness or on a claim of invention on the part of the witness; or
(b) forms an integral part of the events before the court; or
(c) consists of the mere fact that a complaint has been made in a criminal case

Question 68

Define: Hostile witness

Answer 68

means the witness who
• exhibits, or appears to exhibit, a lack of veracity when giving evidence unfavourable to the party who called the witness on a matter about which the witness may reasonably be supposed to have knowledge; or
• gives evidence that is inconsistent with a statement made by that witness in a manner that exhibits, or appears to exhibit, an intention to be unhelpful to the party who called the witness; or
• refuses to answer questions or deliberately withholds evidence.

Question 69

What is the purpose of cross-examination?

Answer 69

• to elicit information supporting the case of the party conducting the cross-examination
• to challenge the accuracy of the testimony given in evidence-in-chief

Question 70

What are unacceptable questions?

Answer 70

In any proceeding, the Judge may disallow, or direct that a witness is not obliged to answer, any question that the Judge considers improper, unfair, misleading, needlessly repetitive, or expressed in language that is too complicated for the witness to understand.

(2) Without limiting the matters that the Judge may take into account for the purposes of subsection (1), the Judge may have regard to—
(a) the age or maturity of the witness; and
(b) any physical, intellectual, psychological, or psychiatric impairment of the witness; and
(c) the linguistic or cultural background or religious beliefs of the witness; and
(d) the nature of the proceeding; and
(e) in the case of a hypothetical question, whether the hypothesis has been or will be proved by other evidence in the proceeding.

Question 71

What is the general rule in s96(1) about prior inconsistent statements?

Answer 71

A party who cross-examines a witness may question the witness about a previous statement made by that witness without showing it or disclosing its contents to the witness if the time, place, and other circumstances concerning the making of the statement are adequately identified to the witness.

Question 72

When can a witness be called to give evidence in rebuttal?

Answer 72

• relates to a purely formal matter
• relates to a matter arising out of the conduct of the defence, the relevance of which could not reasonably have been foreseen (the most common ground for leave to be granted)
• was not available or admissible before the prosecution’s case was closed, or
• is required to be admitted in the interests of justice for any other reason.

Question 73

What are the different types of warnings the judge may give under the Act?

Answer 73

• judicial warning that evidence may be unreliable – s122
• judicial directions about certain ways of giving evidence – s123
• judicial warnings about lies – s124
• judicial directions about children’s evidence – s125
• judicial warnings about identification evidence – s126
• delayed complaints or failure to complain in sexual cases – s127.

Question 74

Under s122 the judge must consider a warning when dealing with what evidence?

Answer 74

(2) In a criminal proceeding tried with a jury the Judge must consider whether to give a warning under subsection (1) whenever the following evidence is given:
(a) hearsay evidence:
(b) evidence of a statement by the defendant, if that evidence is the only evidence implicating the defendant:
(c) evidence given by a witness who may have a motive to give false evidence that is prejudicial to a defendant:
(d) evidence of a statement by the defendant to another person made while both the defendant and the other person were detained in prison, a police station, or another place of detention:
(e) evidence about the conduct of the defendant if that conduct is alleged to have occurred more than 10 years previously.

Question 75

When giving a warning about lies, what advice should be included in the direction?

Answer 75

• the jury needs to be satisfied that the defendant did lie before they use the evidence,
• people lie for various reasons, and
• the jury should not necessarily conclude that just because the defendant lied he or she is guilty of the offence charged.

Question 76

What is prohibited in s125 in regard to directions about children’s evidence?

Answer 76

• the judge from giving warnings about the absence of corroboration where a warning would not have been given in the case of an adult complainant
• any direction or a comment (absent expert evidence to the contrary) that there is a need to scrutinise children’s evidence with special care, or that children generally have a tendency to invent or distort.

Question 77

3 ways of giving evidence

Answer 77

• in the ordinary way - court, affidavit
• in an alternative way - CCTV, DVD
• in any other way provided for by the Evidence Act 2006

Question 78

In deciding whether evidence is admissible, the courts have reference to certain principles of evidence law. These include:

Answer 78

− relevance
− reliability
− unfairness.

Question 79

For facts to be received as evidence they must be

Answer 79

relevant and admissible

Question 80

Propensity evidence includes

Answer 80

• propensity as to actions

* propensity as to state of mind

Question 81

Veracity Rules
In deciding whether or not evidence proposed to be offered about the veracity of a person is substantially helpful, the Judge may consider,

Answer 81

(a) lack of veracity on the part of the person when under a legal obligation to tell the truth (for example, in an earlier proceeding or in a signed declaration):
(b) that the person has been convicted of 1 or more offences that indicate a propensity for dishonesty or lack of veracity:
(c) any previous inconsistent statements made by the person:
(d) bias on the part of the person:
(e) a motive on the part of the person to be untruthful.

Question 82

In deciding whether to give permission for the prosecution to question the defendant about his or her veracity, the judge may take into account

Answer 82

• the extent to which the defendant’s veracity, or the veracity of a prosecution witness, has been put in issue in the defendant’s evidence
• the time that has elapsed since any conviction about which the prosecution seeks to give evidence
• whether any evidence given by the defendant about veracity was elicited by the prosecution.

Question 83

Substantial helpfulness is not a sufficient test in two instances:

Answer 83

• where the prosecution wish to offer evidence about a defendant’s veracity (s38), and
• where a defendant offers veracity evidence about a co-defendant (s39).

Question 84

Why is hearsay evidence unreliable

Answer 84

• where the maker of a statement is not called as a witness, there is no opportunity to cross-examine them
• the rule addresses the concern that juries cannot evaluate evidence properly without being able to see the demeanour of the person who made the statement.
• there is a danger that witnesses will make mistakes about the meaning or content of statements made by other people. “Chinese Whispers”.

Question 85

Purpose of evidence law

Answer 85

Help secure the just determination of proceedings

Question 86

When can you give veracity evidence about a witness you have called

Answer 86

Judge determined the witness was hostile

Question 87

Can you give contrary evidence to a witness you have called

Answer 87

Yes

Question 88

Expert

Answer 88

Person who has specialised knowledge or skill based on training study or experience

Question 89

Propensity evidence does not include

Answer 89

An act or omission that is:

• One of the elements of the offence of which the person is being tried
• the cause of action in the proceeding in question

Question 90

When would communication with a legal advisor be privileged

Answer 90

• communication is intended to be confidential

- communication must be made for the purpose of obtaining or giving legal services