Macmillan Law Masters: Evidence
Macmillan Law Masters: Evidence
Evidence
MACMILLAN LAW MASTERS
Raymond Emson
LLM, Barrister
~
MACMillAN
©Raymond Emson 1999
10987654321
08 07 06 05 04 03 02 01 00 99
Contents
1 Introduction 1
2 Preliminaries 10
2.1 Facts in issue and the ultimate probandum 10
2.2 Proving facts in issue II
2.3 Collateral facts 18
2.4 Proof without evidence 19
2.5 Relevance, probative value and admissibility 19
2.6 The discretion to exclude admissible evidence 19
2.7 The best evidence rule 21
2.8 The tribunals of fact and law 24
7 Admissions 183
7.1 Criminal proceedings: confessions 183
7.2 Civil proceedings: informal admissions 218
14 Privilege 329
14.1 The privilege against self-incrimination 329
14.2 Legal professional privilege 333
14.3 'Without prejudice' communications 340
14.4 Other confidential communications 340
Index 440
Vlll
Table of Cases
F v. Child Support Agency (1999) The Times 9.4.99 HC(FD) 235, 374
Fearon v. DPP (1995) 159 JP 649 DC 113
Fennell v. Jerome Property (1986) The Times 26.11.86 FI 405
Ferguson v. R [1979] 1 WLR 94 PC 365
Filiatra Legacy (The) [1991] 2 Lloyd's Rep 337 CA 405,406
Flanagan v. Fahy [1918] 2 IR 361 CA(I) 402
Fox v. General Medical Council [1960] 1 WLR 1017 PC 401
Francisco v. Diedrick (1998) The Times 3.4.98 FI 236, 368
Freemantle v. R [1994] 1 WLR 1437 PC 226, 267' 272
Table of Cases XI
S v. S [1972] AC 24 HL 373
Sambasivam v. Malaya Federation Public Prosecutor [1950] AC
458 PC 314
Sattin v. National Union Bank [1978] 122 SJ 367 CA 38
Saunders v. UK (1996) 23 EHRR 313 ECHR 330, 331, 333
Savage v. Chief Constable of Hampshire [1997] 1 WLR 1061 CA 323---4
Schenk v. Switzerland (1988) 13 EHRR 242 ECHR 246
Scott v. Baker [1969] 1 QB 659 DC 377
Scott v. London & St Katherine Docks (1865) 3 H & C 596 CEC 378
Table of Cases xxxiii
Table of Statutes
Acknowledgements
The author and publishers are grateful to the following for permission to
reproduce copyright material: New Zealand Council of Law Reporting for
material from its New Zealand Law Reports; Sweet & Maxwell Asia for
material from The Authorised Hong Kong Court of Final Appeal Reports
(Tang Sui Man v. HKSAR (1998) 1 HKLRD 350); The Incorporated
Council of Law Reporting for England and Wales for extracts from The
Law Reports and the Weekly Law Reports; Northern Ireland Court Service
for extracts from the Northern Ireland Law Reports; Sweet & Maxwell UK
for material from Criminal Appeal Reports, Criminal Law Review,
European Human Rights Reports, Current Law, Road Traffic Reports,
Law Quarterly Review; Ausinfo (Government Information for Austra-
lians) for Sections of the Evidence Act 1995 (copyright Commonwealth of
Australia); Supreme Court of Victoria for extracts from the Victoria Law
Reports; Dominion Law Reports (R. v. Smith (1992) 94 Dominion Law
Reports (4th) 590 SC, pp. 603-4 with permission of the Canada Law Book
Inc., through the Canadian Copyright Licensing Agency; The Butter-
worths Division of Reed Elsevier (UK) Limited for material from the
Justice of the Peace Reports and the All England Law Reports; Harvard
Law Review for material from Stone in issue 1932 46 Harv LR 954 at
p. 983; The Controller of Her Majesty's Stationery Office for use of
Crown copyright material concerning the Criminal Law Revision
Committee Eleventh Report and the Law Commission consultation paper
and report; The Independent newspaper and Kate O'Hanlon for a report of
the R. v. Mattan case. Every effort has been made to contact all copyright-
holders, but if any have been inadvertently omitted the publishers will be
pleased to make the appropriate arrangement at the earliest opportunity.