• Join over 1.2 million students every month
  • Accelerate your learning by 29%
  • Unlimited access from just £6.99 per month

The standard definition of hearsay as found in the widely used Black's Law Dictionary.

Extracts from this document...


The standard definition of hearsay as found in the widely used Black's Law Dictionary1: "A statement, other than one made by the declarant while testifying at the trial or hearing, offered in evidence to prove the truth of the matter asserted. Hearsay evidence is testimony in court of a statement made out of court, the statement being offered as an assertion to show the truth of the matter therein, and thus resting for its value upon the credibility of the out of court asserter. Evidence not proceeding from the personal knowledge of the witness, but from the mere repetition of what he has heard others say" However as the definition above also states, there are numerous exceptions to the hearsay rule. An example is when the original declarant is not available and the statement contains indicia of reliability. What is important is that the use of an out of court statement as an assertion of the truth of the content of that out of court statement, as the definition above reads, " to show the truth of matters asserted therein, and thus resting for its value upon the credibility of the out of court asserter". The concern of the hearsay rule is that matters of fact asserted by an individual rely for their truth in part upon the credibility of the individual asserting them. ...read more.


The respondents were wholly successful in their application to dismiss the principal application and were prima facie entitled to an order for cost. In this case there objewction was successful because the could would not allow the speech and said that indeed that it was hearsay, since it was an out of court statement6. As it has been stated above there are respites available that can provide admissibility to the general principal of hearsay. One such example is the case of Subraniam V. Public Prosecutor7. In this case the accused was charged with unlawful possession of ammunition under emergency regulation. It was a defence to have a lawful excuse for possession and the accused sought out to give evidence that he was captured by terrorist, however the trial judge ruled that he could not state that in evidence what the terrorist had said to him as that would amount to hearsay. However the Privy Council quashed the conviction on the following basis, that the evidence of a statement made to a witness by a person who is himself not called a witness may or may not be hearsay. It is hearsay and inadmissible when the object of the evidence is to establish the truth of what is contained in the statement. ...read more.


In Malaysia the Malaysian government have made amendments to the Malaysian Evidence Act which they made in 1993 have now made it possible for a party wishing to adduce evidence in the form of inter alia electronic data stored in a computer, CD-Rom, magnetic diskette or documents produced by a computer, to do so with fewer obstacles. The Evidence Act now also provides that in any criminal proceedings a computer generated document of any statement contained in such document is admissible in evidence of any fact stated therein. It is because of this that to considerable extent particularly in civil case these problems have been resolved by statutory in intervention in the form of The Criminal Justice Act 1988 and the Civil Evidence Act 199510. These are the certain extent to which the rule of hearsay can be admissible in court as evidence. 1 5th Edition. 2 For more on Malaysian law view appendix 1. p.1 3 (1967) 52 Cr App R 80. 4 Jones V. Metcalfe [1967] 3 All ER 205 & Cattermole V. Millar [1978] RTR 258. 5 [2001] FMCA 103. 6 Travers V. State of New South Wales [2000] FCA 1565, & Charles V. Fuji Xerox Australia pty Ltd [2000] FCA 1521. 7 [1956] 1 WLR 965. 8 [1965] AC 1001. 9 Please look at the Statutory Instrument 1990 No. 143 in appendix 2 for the admissibility of hearsay. 10 Refer to appendix 3. ...read more.

The above preview is unformatted text

This student written piece of work is one of many that can be found in our University Degree Law of Evidence section.

Found what you're looking for?

  • Start learning 29% faster today
  • 150,000+ documents available
  • Just £6.99 a month

Not the one? Search for your essay title...
  • Join over 1.2 million students every month
  • Accelerate your learning by 29%
  • Unlimited access from just £6.99 per month

See related essaysSee related essays

Related University Degree Law of Evidence essays

  1. A critical review on Foakes v Beer: Reform of common law at the expense ...

    He understood that the arrangement meant he would not be liable for the other two-thirds. Nevertheless, it was unsuccessful for the court to show that there was a 'genuine triable issue'. It was argued in the article that there was no consideration from Mr Collier and Wright as it was

  2. The common law rule against hearsay evidence had a deserved reputation for being technical ...

    gestae is a "phrase adopted to provide a respectable legal cloak for a variety of cases to which no formula of precision can be applied".[13] This becomes apparent when it is shown that res gestae exceptions are based on "weak theoretical assumptions about the inherent reliability of contemporaneous or spontaneous

  1. Critically discuss the hearsay rule and the exceptions to it

    is made otherwise than by a person, but b. depends for its accuracy on information supplied (directly or indirectly) by a person, the representation is not admissible in criminal proceedings as evidence of the fact unless it is proved that the information was accurate". 6. Statements adduced pursuant to, and satisfying, section 129 are not hearsay.

  2. It is time the rule against hearsay evidence in criminal proceedings was abolished and ...

    Neither is sparks a solitary example.8 It is an established principle that the reliability of a particular piece of hearsay evidence does not guarantee its admissibility. Such as the case of Sparks above, where the victim's mother was to testify.

  1. Burden of Proof. The courts constantly battle with the simple question of: in what ...

    circumstances in which it can be legitimately applied to a qualifying degree. In my opinion it is an advantageous approach. However there is no solve all solution, and upon analysis it also presents some significant problems. It requires very fine detailed analysis of the humongous scope and rationale of the all too many offences to which reverse onuses may apply.

  2. Law of Evidence

    probabilities', this would mean proving that Frederick drunk alcohol after the incident. The standard of proof necessary to discharge the burden of proof relates to the legal and not evidential burden. If a standard of proof is not reached then the party holding the legal burden will lose.

  1. 'The hearsay rule ought to be abolished. Its exceptions are complex and lead to ...

    * Insincerity There might be reason to doubt the sincerity of the statement maker. For example, the person who heard the statement might have been blind to the maker's intended sarcasm. The witness may have had absolutely no intention that his words be taken as an accurate statement of fact.

  2. Impact of Art 6(2) of the European Convention on Human Rights on the ...

    [35] However, in Sheldrake v DPP Lord Bingham cast doubt on Lord Woolf?s proposition, saying that such an approach may lead the court to give too much weight to the enactment under review and too little to the presumption of innocence and the obligation imposed on the court by s3 of the HRA 1998.

  • Over 160,000 pieces
    of student written work
  • Annotated by
    experienced teachers
  • Ideas and feedback to
    improve your own work