Relevance in Evidence Law

qwertyuiopasdfghjklzxcvbnmqwertyui
opasdfghjklzxcvbnmqwertyuiopasdfgh
jklzxcvbnmqwertyuiopasdfghjklzxcvb
nmqwertyuiopasdfghjklzxcvbnmqwer
tyuiopasdfghjklzxcvbnmqwertyuiopas
dfghjklzxcvbnmqwertyuiopasdfghjklzx
cvbnmqwertyuiopasdfghjklzxcvbnmq
wertyuiopasdfghjklzxcvbnmqwertyuio
pasdfghjklzxcvbnmqwertyuiopasdfghj
Evidence Law
Relevance in Evidence Law
31-Mar-18
(Student Details: )

Evidence Law
Introduction
The rule of evidence shows the attempts of making certain that the trial procedure is fair for the
parties. The evidence shows that a party is liable for the allegations imposed on them or not. It is
basically the proof of holding a person guilty. The evidence not only includes the physical
evidence but also testimony and documentary evidence1. Evidence basically is presented to
support any assertion. This could be for establishing a person as guilty of crime, or for getting
the defendant acquitted. Depending upon the evidence being strong or weak, the claims
presented by the party are decided2.
Under the law, the rules of evidence govern the kind of evidence which can be admitted in the
legal proceedings. Those segments in legal case, which are not contradicted by the parties,
become the facts of the case. The remaining parts, where contradictions emerge between the
parties, have to be established before the court. In this context, the evidence comes into play,
which helps in determining the burden of proof which is relevant to the case. Based on the
degree of claims and the gravity of situation, the relevance of evidence is decided on. The
evidence also gets sophisticated with sophisticated case being dealt with, where the theory or
hypothesis of the parties, is established through experimental results and observations based on
scientific evidence3.
Another crucial aspect which revolves around the law of evidence, be it in any jurisdiction, is
relevance of such evidence; and this is also the theme of this discussion. Under the Evidence Act,
1 Roger Alasdair Brown, Documentary Evidence: The Laws of Australia (2nd ed, Thomson Reuters (Professional)
Australia Limited, 2013)
2 Stephen Odgers, Uniform Evidence Law (9th ed, Thomson Reuters, 2010)
3 Miiko Kumar, Stephen Odgers, and Elisabeth Peden, Uniform Evidence Law: Commentary and Materials
(Lawbook Company, 2015)
Page 2

Evidence Law
19954, it is provided that the documents which are formed and covered in electronic or paper
form can be admitted as evidence before the federal courts. This act also relaxes certain
restrictions in some cases, so as to allow any particular evidence in proceedings, in order for
more relevant evidence to be presented before the courts, for the purpose of fact finding. It is
crucial to note here is that evidence is not something which would be accepted just like that.
Only such evidence is accepted by the courts, which is relevant to the particular matter. At the
first blush, relevance is not always clear. And thus, there is a need for a deeper analysis. There is
also the need for more information to be allowed which can be deemed as relevant, so as to allow
for proper evidence to be presented before the court.
Discussion
Relevance is deemed as the propensity of given item of evidence for proving or disproving one
of the lawful elements of the matter, or for having the probative value for making an element of
the case likelier or not. Through probative, the tending to prove is signified, in terms of seeking
the truth. In general, the evidence which is not probative in law, i.e. which does not tend to
establish the proposal for which it had been proffered is not admissible. The rules of evidence
allow for it to be excluded from any proceeding or for it to be stricken from the record where the
same is objected by opposing counsel. The admissibility of evidence is dependent on the
relevance of it to the fact in issue under the legal proceeding5.
In Australia, the rule of evidence is a mix of common law and the statute. There is a uniform
Evidence Act in the nation, which is an act of the Commonwealth. There are also acts of each
4 Evidence Act, 1995 (Cth)
5 Kenneth J. Arenson and Mirko Bagaric, Rules of Evidence in Australia: Text & Cases (2nd ed, LexisNexis
Butterworths, 2007)
Page 3

Evidence Law
jurisdiction on this matter, which includes for New South Wales it is Evidence Act, 19956; for
Victoria it is Evidence Act, 20087; for Tasmania it is Evidence Act, 20018; for Australian Capital
Territory it is Evidence Act, 20119; for Northern Territory it is Evidence (National Uniform
Legislation) Act, 201110; and for Norfolk Island it is Evidence Act, 200411. The rules of evidence
work towards making certain that the criminal trials are undertaken in such a way which proves
to be fair to both the parties in the legal case and where the specific focus is laid down on testing
of evidence12.
In R v Wilson, it was stated by Barwick CJ that the basic rule which governed the evidence
admissibility was that it had to be relevant13. There was a need for the proffered evidence in
every instance to be brought down ultimately to that touchstone. Under Chapter 3 of the
Evidence Act of commonwealth, the admissibility of evidence is dealt with14. The evidence is
generally admissible when it is relevant, and the vice versa situation is also true, in terms of the
irrelevant evidence being inadmissible. Evidence is deemed as relevant where it is such evidence
which in case is accepted, could influence the evaluation of probability of the facts in issue, in a
rational manner, in the proceedings, be it in direct or indirect manner15.
Since the relevant evidence has the capacity of affecting the evaluation or the consideration of
probability of the facts in issue being in existence, it is deemed as probative16. Another name
6 Evidence Act, 1995 (NSW)
7 Evidence Act, 2008 (Vic)
8 Evidence Act, 2001 (Tas)
9 Evidence Act, 2011 (ACT)
10 Evidence (National Uniform Legislation) Act, 2011 (NT)
11 Evidence Act, 2004 (NI)
12 Judicial Commission of New South Wales, Relevance (2018)
<https://www.judcom.nsw.gov.au/publications/benchbks/civil/relevance.html>
13 R v Wilson (1970) 123 CLR 334 at [337]
14 Evidence Act 1995, ch3
15 Evidence Act 1995, s55; Smith v The Queen [2001] HCA 50
16 Papakosmas v The Queen (1999) 196 CLR 297 at [81]
Page 4