A more recent version of these Civil Evidence notes – written by City Law School students – is available here.
The following is a more accessble plain text extract of the PDF sample above, taken from our BPTC Civil Ligitation Notes. Due to the challenges of extracting text from PDFs, it will have odd formatting:
Civil Evidence Burden and standard of proof What is the standard of proof in civil proceedings?
On the balance of probabilities.
Who bears the burden of proof?
Competence and compellability of witnesses What is the general rule?
What are the exceptions to this rule?
(1) Any person is competent in any proceedings; and (2) All competent witnesses are compellable.
Hearsay in civil proceedings Is hearsay evidence admissible?
Children: Any person under 18 who does not understand the nature of the oath may only give evidence if: (i) He understands the nature of the duty to speak the truth; and (ii) He has sufficient understanding to justify his evidence being heard. Persons of unsound mind: Any person of unsound mind is competent if: (i) He has sufficient appreciation of the seriousness of the proceedings; and (ii) He has a realisation that taking the oath involves something more than the duty to tell the truth in day-to-day life. Sovereigns, heads of State and diplomats: All competent but not compellable.
Civil Evidence Act 1995, s1: Yes, evidence should not be excluded by reason that it is hearsay.
What are the conditions for hearsay being admissible?
Civil Evidence Act 1995, s5(1): That the statement maker, and in cases of multiple hearsay all the makers, would be competent to give evidence in court.
On whom does the burden of proof rest for admitting this evidence?
The burden is on the party wishing to exclude the evidence to show that the maker was not competent.
Buy the full version of these notes or essay plans and more in our BPTC Civil Ligitation Notes.