Analysis of Evidence Law: Browne v Dunn, Evidence Act, and Common Law

This essay provides a comprehensive analysis of evidence law, focusing on the rule in Browne v Dunn, the Evidence (National Uniform Legislation) Act (NT), and common law principles. The introduction establishes the foundational concepts of evidence law, emphasizing its role in organizing and validating evidence within legal proceedings. The essay then delves into the Evidence (National Uniform Legislation) Act, highlighting key sections concerning witness competency, compellability, and exceptions related to spouse/partner privilege and victim protection, particularly in cases of domestic violence and offenses against minors. The core of the essay examines the landmark case of Brown v Dunn, elucidating the rule's impact on cross-examination, anti-ambush principles, and the importance of providing witnesses with an opportunity to address contradictory evidence. The essay also explores the role of common law in the English legal system, emphasizing its capacity to adapt legal principles and influence judicial decisions. The scope of the Evidence Act and common law is then discussed in relation to Brown v Dunn, underscoring the case's contribution to clarifying cross-examination procedures and reinforcing the importance of fair trial processes. In conclusion, the essay synthesizes the relationships between evidence law, common law, and the case study to provide a holistic understanding of the subject.

Evidence Law

INTRODUCTION...........................................................................................................................3
ESSAY.............................................................................................................................................3
Evidence National Uniform Legislation Act...............................................................................3
Case Brown v Dunn.....................................................................................................................4
Common law................................................................................................................................5
Scope of Evidence act and common law in relation to case of Brown v Dunn...........................6
CONCLUSION................................................................................................................................7
REFRENCES...................................................................................................................................7
INTRODUCTION
Law of evidence is known as those rules that organizes evidences which helps in
providing valid proof in relation facts and legal aspects which is been presented within particular
proceeding of a case. In other words evidence law are those set of guidelines which has made
legality attained within evidences in relation to particular case. The law has formed in order to
specialize various and cover major points which enhances validity of particular proof presented
within a case. Evidence law acts as machinery through which substantive laws is been formed
and process of fair proceedings is kept in motion. Scope of these laws are wider as it deals over
rights and procedure existing within evidences. Nature of evidence law covers different aspects
in relation to case that has been presented. In this essay things that has to be covered is based
upon case study, Evidence National Uniform Legislation Act and common law is been covered.
ESSAY
Evidence National Uniform Legislation Act
The act has been formed in order to regulate the evidences that has to be presented while
trial or proceedings is done within particular offence. Under the act justification provided upon
various kinds of evidences and there applicability upon particular case. Under the act there are
certain important section that section 12, 13, 18 and 19. Section 12 and 13 of the act which
explains that any individual can give evidence unless they are due to some valid reason is
incapable of presenting it. This condition includes mental, intellectual or physical disability. Also

section 12 further provides that if an witness is competent and they are compellable then may
choose that weather to present the evidence or not. Section 18 of the act operates upon an
exception to the presumption that provides that that a spouse, de facto partner, parent or child of
the defendant may object to being required to give evidence. Also the section explains that
presiding judge should determine whether the witness should be required over giving evidence
then it can be considered under following conditions that is (a) The likelihood that harm would
or might be caused (whether directly or indirectly) to the person, or to the relationship
between the person and the defendant, if the person gives evidence and (b) whether the
nature and extent of the harm outweighs the desirability of having the evidence given.
Further section 18 of the act is been applied within criminal proceedings and does not apply over
domestic violence order or any other order that is covers cases related to civil nature. Then
comes section 19 of Evidence (National Uniform Legislation) Act. It deals with the exceptions
related to section 18 which covers that victim within proceedings over an offence should not be
below the age of sixteen. The proceeding over an offence against section 43BI and provision
related to Part VII of Criminal Code attempts and preparation to commit offence, conspiracy,
accessories. This has specified that the age of the victim should not be under sixteen years of age
(Gaitán, Herrera-Echeverri and Pablo, 2018. ).
Case Brown v Dunn
The case is based upon the rules related to cross examination and the judgement within
this has been passed by British House of lords. In this case the rule that has come out entitles that
cross examiner cannot rely upon evidence which is contradictory towards the proof of the
witness which does not allow evidences in relation to evidences that makes justification in
relation to the evidences to be presented by the witness. This is required for justifying of facts
and law that has been used within the case. Also evidences logical justification which is based
upon scenario of the case is logically justified. That is why as per the rule explains that witness
gives inconsistency over opposing party leading as per evidence. The opposing party should raise
contention during cross examination. Further the rule is also observed as anti-ambush rule which
stops party in order to present by a party within a particular case. In this opportunity in relation
to relevancy regarding fair cross examination becomes more relevant and justified after this case.
If this rule has not been developed then opportunity in relation to opposing witness cannot be
developed stooped which made earlier proceedings to be more time consuming. Also the case

has given clarification upon challenging the witness only after hearing or cross examine him or
her.
Also the facts of the case gave rise to a civil case which involves parties James Loxham
Browne and Cecil W. The case is related to Dunn in a way that hated like document was issued
on behalf of other addressed to Browne Vale. The document indicated that all the signatories
and residents of The Vale, Hampstead, and requested Dunn apply for an order against Browne to
keep the peace. The case was presented with subsequent breach of Peace hearing in this Brown
became aware over document and commenced libel proceedings in relation to all the parties
involved. As the proceeding was going on it was founded that no documents were shown by
Brown to signatories during the cross examination also he never produced a document. When the
hearing was taking place he suddenly presented a document and the jury eventually found in
favor of Browne and ordered damages of 20 shillings. Dunn again appealed and the verdict was
been given. The Brown appealed in House of Lords in the appeal it was found that number of
signatories were presented at the original trial and it was never asked that documents were
genuine or not (Edmond and Roberts, 2017).
Case makes rules established which says that witness is been given evidence and if the
evidence is been contradict then substance or proof should be presented within the court while
cross examination is going and opportunity should be given to given valid point for it. Rule is
based over principles which is unfair and deny that witness was not given opportunity to be
heard or explained a point that has been later used for proving invalidity of evidence by another
party. This disturbs the process of court over providing judgment over disbelief within the
evidence. This can also lead upon collapsing of justice process. It results into making explanation
of contradiction in relation to evidence that has been witnessed compulsory through this rule the
transparency within the judiciary is protected and justice is served well. In Brown v Dunn the
Judicial Council of the House of Lords has said that it can be observed form the conduct of the
cause where it intends for making suggestion through witness and evidences it can be marked
that statement presented by witness not true in relation to the cause. That has made cross
examination of the facts is to be done through questioning method. In the end court close case
with these lines “ if you intend to impeach a witness you are bound, whilst he is still in the
box, to give him.

Common law
This is the laws that is been used within the English legal system in order to make it more
justified and accurate. As per these law can be formed or amended as per the requirement of
modern legal aspects that provide relevancy to the legal system of United Kingdom. Also such
laws allows judiciary to use their power to make laws which is beneficial in relation to various
aspects related to society. These are those law which has been developed in England as a body
which makes decision of judiciary based upon customs and precedents which is written within
the court. It is one of the most important part of English legal system (Dissanaike and et. al..,
2021). These laws is been formed through using a landmark judgment passed within particular
case to be used within the similar case in future. These cases is been recorded within the report
that is been prepared by legal authority in it all important judgment is been recorded. Further it
gives power to judges to from laws at times when law passed by legislation is causing disorder
within society. Further it can be observed that common laws are those body of unwritten laws
that is related upon legal precedents which has been established by the courts of UK, US and
Australia. Common law has been influencing decision making process in those cases where it
becomes difficult for court to apply the existing statues or written laws. Some important points
that has been marked in such laws are common law is known as case law or body that is
unwritten or is based upon legal precedents that has been established by courts. Then common
law is outcome of the institutionalized opinions and interpretation form the judges and
authorities of court. Common laws sometimes prove the inspiration for new legislation to be
enacted. Further it has given power to judiciary over acting against those laws that violates basic
structure of constitution within UK. This is useful for recording of those cases which is proven to
be very useful in relation over case that has similar condition exists within future.
Scope of Evidence act and common law in relation to case of Brown v Dunn
The case has been proven to be one of the most relevant cases within which the
judgement has been passed to justify the cross examination which is been covered within the
Evidence National Uniform Legislation Act. Further case has helped in making sure that various
sections in the act is been amended in proper manner. Cross examination is the process that helps
in making sure that facts presented within the case is correct or not. These facts is been crossed
checked by asking questions to witness. Under the act it has been justified that cross examination
can be done but only under certain circumstances. The case has helped in making clarity about

the cross examination that it is been done. The case has helped in forming of rule that cross
examination can be done under any circumstances where it is found that the witness is not telling
proper facts or hiding something related to case. Common law is related to such case in a way
that it has given power to judges for forming of rules which has provided more relevancy to the
process of examination (Deleidi, Meloni and Stirati, 2018).
CONCLUSION
From the above discussion it can be marked out that evidence laws are those laws that has
been formed in order to provide relevancy to the facts. These laws provides provisions in relation
to the evidences and witnesses that has to be presented within case. Further the essay covers
about the case study which is based upon cross examination done to a witness. Then common
laws has been explained that gives power to judges in order to from laws or amend then through
motive of maintaining peace within society. In the end relationship of evidence law and common
law is explained in relation to case study.
REFRENCES
Books and journals
Deleidi, M., Meloni, W.P. and Stirati, A., 2018. Structural change, labour productivity and the
Kaldor-Verdoorn law: evidence from European countries (No. 0239). Department of
Economics-University Roma Tre.
Dissanaike, G and et. al.., 2021. The economics of law enforcement: Quasi-experimental
evidence from corporate takeover law. Journal of Corporate Finance, 67, p.101849.
Edmond, G. and Roberts, A., 2017. The law commission’s report on expert evidence in criminal
proceedings. Expert Evidence and Scientific Proof in Criminal Trials.
Gaitán, S., Herrera-Echeverri, H. and Pablo, E., 2018. How corporate governance affects
productivity in civil-law business environments: Evidence from Latin America. Global
Finance Journal, 37, pp.173-185.
Hu, S.Q., Ong, Y.C. and Page, D.N., 2019. No evidence for violation of the second law in
extended black hole thermodynamics. Physical Review D, 100(10), p.104022.
López-Sánchez, J.I. and Hancock, P.A., 2019. Diminishing cognitive capacities in an ever hotter
world: evidence from an applicable power-law description. Human factors, 61(6),
pp.906-919.

Muneeza, A., 2017. Application of law of evidence to Islamic banking with special reference to
Malaysia. International Journal of Islamic and Middle Eastern Finance and Management.
Park, J. and Hassan, S., 2018. Does the influence of empowering leadership trickle down?
Evidence from law enforcement organizations. Journal of Public Administration
Research and Theory, 28(2), pp.212-225.
Spáč, P., Voda, P. and Zagrapan, J., 2018. Does the freedom of information law increase
transparency at the local level? Evidence from a field experiment. Government
Information Quarterly, (3).
Van Rooij, B., 2020. Do people know the law? Empirical evidence about legal knowledge and its
implications for compliance. Van Rooij, B.(2021 (Forthcoming)). Do people know the
law.