LLW4007 S2B1 2022 Assignment 2A: Analysis of Legal Evidence and Rules

This assignment analyzes a legal case involving Roslie and Josue, focusing on the evidence presented and the application of the Evidence Act 2008 (Vic) and common law principles. Question 1 examines the admissibility of evidence, including an umbrella, shirts, and witness statements, and the ability of Josue to develop grounds against Roslie's objections. The analysis considers issues of materiality and relevance, and the importance of evidence in directing the court. Question 2 addresses the closing submissions, particularly what Josue could include, considering the lack of evidence from Roslie's side, and the relevance of circumstantial evidence, corroborating evidence, and hearsay. The assignment emphasizes the significance of evidence, including witness testimonies, medical reports, and CCTV footage, in strengthening a party's case and influencing the magistrate's decision. The conclusion highlights that the closing submission of Josue adduced evidence over the evidence of Roslie.

0
LLW4007 S2B1 2022: FACTS & QUESTION FOR ASSIGNMENT
2A

1
Table of Contents
Question 1........................................................................................................................................2
Question 2........................................................................................................................................4
Bibliography....................................................................................................................................6

2
Question 1
Issue
The issue is Roslie object and stated at the court against Josue, Josue threatened Roslie with fist
hand for that reason she only slapped on the hand of Josue. The umbrella that is produced in the
court as evidence is not the umbrella of her. On the other hand she also claimed that Josue is
going to bring out something big from his bag because of that she also got feared. Jossue
produced the court fake evidence. So the issue of the Jossue is whether he is able to develop any
ground against the objection of Roslie.
Rule
The rules of evidence at Common Law1 stated that legal rules always prohibit the production
court presentation of the evidence on the time trials even though those are relevant to the various
factual propositions of the subject of matter or the materials. On the other hand there is also need
to mention that the respective rule further renders inadmissible to the evidence that they apply to
and require that the judge exclude that. For example the rules against the evidence for character
and the rule against the bavardage evidence. On the other hand evidence that is inadmissible
irrelevant means is immaterial or meaningless that easily can be refused as there is no such
evidence can be retained from that2. So there is a need to understand the materiality or
admissibility of any evidence that may be produced or adducted as evidence in the court.
Evidence Act 2008 (Vic)3. is stated that evidence can be produced at the time of the proceeding
of any case to provide the court an appropriate direction. The direction making only takes place
if a party, plaintiff or defendant in the time of proceeding of the application for such a
direction to properly proof of a fact that takes place and as per the court’s opinion there are
need of proof for proceeding about the fact because that is significant in determination of the
sentence that has provided by the court must be imposed in the time of proceeding. The
respective act also provides a clear idea about “Competence and compellability of witnesses”4.
1 "Rule Of Evidence In Criminal And Civil Proceedings - Ipleaders", Ipleaders (Webpage, 2022)
<https://blog.ipleaders.in/rule-of-evidence-in-criminal-and-civil-proceedings/#:~:text=Legal%20rules%20prohibit
%20the%20presentation,the%20rule%20against%20character%20evidence.>.
2 "Rule Of Evidence In Criminal And Civil Proceedings - Ipleaders", Ipleaders (Webpage, 2022)
<https://blog.ipleaders.in/rule-of-evidence-in-criminal-and-civil-proceedings/#:~:text=Legal%20rules%20prohibit
%20the%20presentation,the%20rule%20against%20character%20evidence.>.
3 vicbar.com.au, Vicbar.Com.Au (Webpage, 2022) <https://www.vicbar.com.au/sites/default/files/Evidence%20Act
%202008%20%28Examinable%20Excerpts%20as%20at%202%20October%202017%29_0.pdf>.
4 vicbar.com.au, Vicbar.Com.Au (Webpage, 2022) <https://www.vicbar.com.au/sites/default/files/Evidence%20Act
%202008%20%28Examinable%20Excerpts%20as%20at%202%20October%202017%29_0.pdf>.

3
The respective act provides clear guidelines about the production of the witness at the court as a
witness; the respective act stated that every person is capable of providing evidence in the court.
On the other hand a person who is competent to provide evidence about the respective fact is
properly compellable to provide the evidence. Craig Vs. South Australia5 is one of the cases
where various pieces of evidence are used to provide sentences in the court.
Application
In the respective matter Josue can easily on the ground of Common Law of Evidence6 and also
on the Evidence Act 2008 (Vic), can produce the facts of his side with the evidence of Umbrella,
shirts and eyewitness statement of Majlinda. The medical report of Josue is another piece of
evidence that also provides strength to his side. Josue also as per the Evidence Act 2008, also
strengthened his side because tongue he produces each and every evidence at the court but there
is no such evidence is produced in the court from the side of the Roslie. So claims of Roslie
cannot be heard or provided support by the court without any evidence. Even Roslie did not ask
Naliya to testify at the court.
Conclusion
Based on the respective case it can be concluded that a party without appropriate evidence either
that is an eyewitness or it is a kind of material or document evidence never can be claimed by a
person or to another party. On the other hand to prove any fact or direct the court to realise about
the facts there is a need for evidence. The respective case is grounded upon the evidence without
the complaint of Roslie being groundless against Josue. Regardless that Josue can ask or request
the court for providing the evidence or witness from the side of Roslie, as only on the ground of
the statement of a person court cannot provide with any sentence or verdict against Josue as he
has enough proof to direct the court about the fact.
5 Netk.net.au, "Australian Cases: Craig V The State Of South Australia 1995 High Court - Certiorari In Criminal
Cases", Netk.Net.Au (Webpage, 2022) <http://netk.net.au/Australia/Craig.asp>.
6 State Library of NSW, "Precedent And Evidence", State Library Of NSW (Webpage, 2022)
<https://legalanswers.sl.nsw.gov.au/hot-topics-courts-and-tribunals/precedent-and-evidence>.

4
Question 2
Issue
The issue is that there is no such evidence or witnesses are submitted from the sides of the
Roslie. However, she provides various objections against Josue. So, on the time of inviting both
the parties to make the closing submission from the sides of the Magistrate what may be included
in the closing statement of Josue that are most preferable by the magistrate over the evidences
that are adduced by the defendant Roslie in the court.
Rule
Common Law provides a clear idea about the circumstantial evidence. According to the
respective law the circumstantial evidence is the proof that supports proving all various factual
matters in the terms of proving other various events as well as of the circumstances from which
reasonably be inferred from the matter of occurrence. Corroborating Evidence7 is another type
of evidence that is independent but strengthens the case as that is presented in the court as
evidence. On the other hand, the hearsay is a declaration or claim provided as evidence that what
is claimed is accurate by a court and not under oath. On the other hand, according to the Federal
Court of Australia8, there is also a need to mention that anyone who is able to provide the
information to support the court to understand the facts properly are known as the witness. Both
the plaintiff and defendant are able to produce witnesses to strengthen his or her sides in the
courts. The respective system also clearly states that there are no such lawyers required to hire
for providing the witness in the court. An affidavit must be with the full form of the name,
address, occupation only needed to mention and also of the full evidence that is faced or seen by
that person.
Application
Roslie still not produces any evidence as well as of the witness from the sides of her that is one
of the most important grounds for Josue included with that, he can refer the court about the
evidence of the Umbrella that is used by the Roslie at the time of attacking him, Shirts that he
wore on the time of the incident. On the other hand, he asked the court for checking the CCTV
footage of the place at which the attack takes place as there are in many cases and in the court
appeal there are the checking of the CCTV takes place that also strengthen his side. On the other
hand, Josue also can ask Majlinda for providing the witness for him in the court against Roslie.
7 fedcourt.gov.au (Webpage, 2022) <https://www.fedcourt.gov.au/going-to-court/i-am-a-witness/being-a-witness>.
8 fedcourt.gov.au (Webpage, 2022) <https://www.fedcourt.gov.au/going-to-court/i-am-a-witness/being-a-witness>.

5
On the other hand, all the reports of the hospital at which Josie is admitted after the attack and
injury that also can be submitted in the court as evidence in the court to strengthen his case. On
the other hand, Roslies' past record about her work and the tendency of spreading misinformation
also can be easily used as a closing document to the court. Josue was also able to strengthen his
case with providing the blood report of the umbrella and also the shirts that are also supportive
for understanding the Magistrate that the blood of the attacking weapon and the blood of the
shirts are of the same person that is of Josue. His wife Aiko’s statements also can be included as
a form of the affidavit in the court.
Conclusion
Based on the respective study it can be concluded that there is no such evidence or witness
produced from the sides of Roslie so all the respective evidences with the closing submission
support and strengthen the case of Josue. Josue’s closing submission with his medical report
helps the magistrate to understand that umbrella attack of Roslie was severe for him. That can
make the magistrate understand his ground. That also can be able to provide the decision of
checking the CCTV footage of the day. Roslie’s nature and tendency of providing
misinformation also grounded the case of Josue. As there are no such evidences are produced by
Roslie in the court so it can be stated that the closing submission of Josuie adduced evidence
over the evidence of Roslie though Roslie testifies Naliya for providing the witness statement.

6
Bibliography
"Rule Of Evidence In Criminal And Civil Proceedings - Ipleaders", Ipleaders (Webpage, 2022)
https://blog.ipleaders.in/rule-of-evidence-in-criminal-and-civil-proceedings/#:~:text=Legal
%20rules%20prohibit%20the%20presentation,the%20rule%20against%20character
%20evidence.
fedcourt.gov.au (Webpage, 2022)
<https://www.fedcourt.gov.au/going-to-court/i-am-a-witness/being-a-witness>
Netk.net.au, "Australian Cases: Craig V The State Of South Australia 1995 High Court -
Certiorari In Criminal Cases", Netk.Net.Au (Webpage, 2022)
http://netk.net.au/Australia/Craig.asp
State Library of NSW, "Precedent And Evidence", State Library Of NSW (Webpage, 2022)
https://legalanswers.sl.nsw.gov.au/hot-topics-courts-and-tribunals/precedent-and-evidence
vicbar.com.au, Vicbar.Com.Au (Webpage, 2022)
https://www.vicbar.com.au/sites/default/files/Evidence%20Act%202008%20%28Examinable
%20Excerpts%20as%20at%202%20October%202017%29_0.pdf