To distinguish between relevancy and admissibility.docx -...

This preview shows page 1 - 2 out of 3 pages.

To distinguish between relevancy and admissibility, I would like to explain the meaning of relevancy and admissibility before we proceed to the difference between these two concepts. According to Janab’s Key to Evidence, relevancy refers to the degree of connection and probative value between a fact that is given in evidence and the issue to be proved. Relevancy of facts had been provided from Section 5 to 55 of Evidence Act 1950. By referring to the illustration (a) provided in Section 5 where A is tried for the murder of B by beating him with a club with the intention of causing his death. There are three facts in issue to be proved - A ’s beating B with the club; A ’s causing B ’s death by the beating; and A ’s intention to cause B ’s death. A fact is relevant when it is so related to the fact in issue, that they render the fact in issue probable or improbable. For example, to prove the third facts in issue in the example just now, the facts that A and B was having quarrel before the murder happens is relevant to prove the third facts in issue which is A’s intention to cause B’s death. Admissibility involves the process whereby the court determines whether the Law of Evidence permits that relevant evidence to be received by the court. The concept of admissibility is often distinguished from relevancy. Relevancy is determined by logic and common sense, practical or

  • Left Quote Icon

    Student Picture

  • Left Quote Icon

    Student Picture

  • Left Quote Icon

    Student Picture