Search results
Results From The WOW.Com Content Network
Pepper (Inspector of Taxes) v Hart [1992] UKHL 3, is a landmark decision of the House of Lords on the use of legislative history in statutory interpretation.The court established the principle that when primary legislation is ambiguous then, in certain circumstances, the court may refer to statements made in the House of Commons or House of Lords in an attempt to interpret the meaning of the ...
For evidence to be admissible enough to be admitted, the party proffering the evidence must be able to show that the source of the evidence makes it so. If evidence is in the form of witness testimony, the party that introduces the evidence must lay the groundwork for the witness's credibility and knowledge.
Evidence governs the use of testimony (e.g., oral or written statements, such as an affidavit), exhibits (e.g., physical objects), documentary material, or demonstrative evidence, which are admissible (i.e., allowed to be considered by the trier of fact, such as jury) in a judicial or administrative proceeding (e.g., a court of law).
In United States law, the Frye standard, Frye test, or general acceptance test is a judicial test used in some U.S. state courts to determine the admissibility of scientific evidence. It provides that expert opinion based on a scientific technique is admissible only when the technique is generally accepted as reliable in the relevant scientific ...
It is a hearing to determine the admissibility of evidence, or the competency of a witness or juror. [5] As the subject matter of the voir dire often relates to evidence, competence or other matters that may lead to bias on behalf of the jury, the jury may be removed from the court for the voir dire.
To be admissible, the evidence must be otherwise admissible, and the maker of the statement identified to the court's satisfaction. Additionally, the absent person making the original statement must fall within one of following categories: [19] Dead; Unfit to be a witness because of bodily or mental condition
Kevin Hart is being accused by a former friend of submitting fabricated evidence to the L.A. County district attorney in the wake of his 2017 sex tape scandal.
Under the common law, such evidence was at one time considered hearsay - a statement made out of court being introduced to prove the truth of the statement - and was not admissible except to rebut the testimony of an opposing expert witness. There were four ways to introduce such evidence: [citation needed]