Relevance and Admissibility

Taylor v Taylor evidence may be distinguished between inadmissible per se and one which would have been rejected as inadmissible upon objection.
S 179, 51-supra, DPP V Kilbourne evidence is relevant if it is logically probative or dis-probative of some matter which require proof.Mensah v Republic general rule for admissibility is sufficient relevance to issues. Probative value is the logical connection between evidence and proposition, ultimate fact or factum probandum to be proved.R v Randal on ruling on admissibility on relevance to decide whether evidence capable of decreasing or increasing probability of fact’s existence.

Exclusion: S 52-supraR v Sang though legally or strictly admissible judge may exclude where its prejudicial effect outweighs probative value, S 6 inadmissible evidence once offered must be timeously objected to so it doesn’t go into record. Evidence once admitted though inadmissible if it were objected to cannot be the basis for overturning a decision on the said evidence unless substantial miscarriage of justice has occasioned it.Aryeh v Iddrisuif at time of offer of otherwise inadmissible evidence party fails to object it forms part of court record and court will be entitled to consider it in evaluating evidence on record. Per Abowaba v Adeshina and Bisi v Tabii hold that where it’s allowed to go into record, judge is bound to take it into consideration and affected party can’t complain on appeal or review, however position of judge is now discretionary as entitled and not bound.

Yaw Oppong v Anarfi even where erroneously admitted reversal is only possible under S 5(2) where there has been substantial miscarriage of justice, although court may err in excluding evidence from admission same isn’t liable to setting aside as no miscarriage is found and error inured to benefit of party offering same.

Judge’s discretion either inclusionary or exclusionary. Per CL no discretion to include legally inadmissible evidence,State v Brobbey & Nipa Apaloo erred in receiving inadmissible evidence (incriminating statement of one of the accused who had been acquitted and discharged) against other accused persons as same wasn’t admissible against them. Amoah v Arthur since P did not plead fraud as basis of claim, all evidence proving fraud should not have been considered at all. Tormekey v Ahiable if inadmissible evidence is received with or without objection, duty of judge to reject it when giving judgement or such evidence will be rejected on appeal as court of law is to arrive at decisions based on legal evidence only.

S 5 erroneous admitted or excluded evidence affecting judgement doesn’t make it liable to setting aside unless substantial miscarriage of justice occasions judgement, (2) in determining miscarriage court consider whether said evidence was relied on, whether an objection to exclude same could and should have been made, whether objection ground should have been stated, whether it should have been excluded upon objection, whether different conclusion would have been reached but for the admission (3) on appeal such erroneous exclusion or inclusion must be made known. S 31 of Act 459 appeal in criminal case will be allowed only in miscarriage of justice, error of law or fact or unreasonable and unsupportable by evidence, all other grounds will be dismissed as to technical or procedural error.

S 8 empowers court to reject inadmissible evidence admitted at trial (would have been inadmissible if objected to) even if no objection is raised to them.Bonsu alias Benjilo v Repif two jointly tried person make unsworn statement each, such not admissible against the other unless accepted, but admissible if given on oath. S 178 in applying Act under S 8 recourse should be had to fairness and a party not represented by lawyer

S 32 of Stamp Duty Act 2005 (Act 689) instrument chargeable with duty is admissible whether stamped or not upon payment of penalty payable on stamping in court.
Multiple admissible evidence-where admissible at one instance and inadmissible at another, then admissible where admissible. S 56 where after an event measures are taken if previously taken would have made event less likely to occur, evidence of subsequent measures not admissible to prove negligence or culpability but admissible for any other purpose.S 57 evidence of plea guilt which is later withdrawn isn’t admissible in civil or criminal action involving said person.

Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

You cannot copy content of this page