Evidence Act 1995 (NSW)
An Act about the law of evidence, and for related purposes.
This Act sets out the State rules of evidence. Generally speaking, the Act applies to proceedings in State courts and before other persons or bodies required to apply the laws of evidence (see section 4).
Chapter 2 is about how evidence is adduced in proceedings.
Chapter 3 is about admissibility of evidence in proceedings.
Chapter 4 is about proof of matters in proceedings.
Chapter 5 deals with miscellaneous matters.
The Dictionary at the end of this Act defines terms and expressions used in this Act.
This Act is in most respects uniform with the Evidence Act 1995 of the Commonwealth. The 2 Acts are drafted in identical terms except so far as differences are identified by appropriate annotations to the texts, and except so far as minor drafting variations are required because one Act is a New South Wales Act and one Act is a Commonwealth Act.
If one Act contains a provision that is not included in the other Act, the numbering of the other Act has a gap in the numbering in order to maintain consistent numbering for the other provisions.
In relation to the taking of evidence outside New South Wales for the purposes of proceedings in the State and in relation to the taking of evidence in the State for the purposes of proceedings outside New South Wales see the Evidence on Commission Act 1995.
This Act is the Evidence Act 1995.
This Part and the Dictionary at the end of this Act commence on the date of assent.
The remaining provisions of this Act commence on a day or days to be appointed by proclamation.
Expressions used in this Act (or in a particular provision of this Act) that are defined in the Dictionary at the end of this Act have the meanings given to them in the Dictionary.
Notes included in this Act are explanatory notes and do not form part of this Act.
Without limiting the effect of, and subject to, section 34 of the Interpretation Act 1987, material that may be used in the interpretation of a provision of this Act includes any relevant report of a Law Reform Commission laid before either House of the Parliament of the Commonwealth before the provision was enacted.
Some expressions used in this Act are defined in the Interpretation Act 1987, and have the meanings given to them in that Act.
The Commonwealth Act includes a different subsection (3). This is to the same effect as section 6 of the Interpretation Act 1987. Subsection (3) of the NSW Act is covered by section 15AB of the Acts Interpretation Act 1901 of the Commonwealth.
This Act applies to all proceedings in a NSW court, including proceedings that—
(a) relate to bail, subject to Division 4 of Part 3 of the Bail Act 2013, or
(b) are interlocutory proceedings or proceedings of a similar kind, or
(c) are heard in chambers, or
(d) subject to subsection (2), relate to sentencing.
If such a proceeding relates to sentencing—
(a) this Act applies only if the court directs that the law of evidence applies in the proceeding, and
(b) if the court specifies in the direction that the law of evidence applies only in relation to specified matters—the direction has effect accordingly.
The court must make a direction if—
(a) a party to the proceeding applies for such a direction in relation to the proof of a fact, and
(b) in the court’s opinion, the proceeding involves proof of that fact, and that fact is or will be significant in determining a sentence to be imposed in the proceeding.
The court must make a direction if the court considers it appropriate to make such a direction in the interests of justice.
Section 4 of the Commonwealth Act differs from this section. It applies that Act to proceedings in a federal court or an ACT court. Some provisions of the Commonwealth Act extend beyond proceedings in federal courts and ACT courts (see sections 5, 185, 186 and 187 of the Commonwealth Act).
The Commonwealth Act includes 2 additional subsections that exclude the application of that Act to appeals from a court of a State (including appeals from a court of a State exercising federal jurisdiction) and certain other courts.
See section 79 of the Judiciary Act 1903 of the Commonwealth for the application of this Act to proceedings in a State court exercising federal jurisdiction.
* * * * *
The Commonwealth Act includes a provision that extends the application of specified provisions of the Commonwealth Act to proceedings in all Australian courts.
* * * * *
The Commonwealth Act includes a provision extending that Act to each external Territory.
This Act binds the Crown in right of New South Wales and also, so far as the legislative power of Parliament permits, in all its other capacities.
This Act does not affect the operation of the provisions of any other Act.
The Commonwealth Act includes additional subsections relating to the operation of the Corporations Act 2001 of the Commonwealth, the Australian Securities and Investments Commission Act 2001 of the Commonwealth and certain laws in force in the ACT. It also provides for the regulations to have continued effect (until amended) after the commencement of the Commonwealth section.
This Act does not affect the operation of a principle or rule of common law or equity in relation to evidence in a proceeding to which this Act applies, except so far as this Act provides otherwise expressly or by necessary intendment.
Without limiting subsection (1), this Act does not affect the operation of such a principle or rule so far as it relates to any of the following—
(a) admission or use of evidence of reasons for a decision of a member of a jury, or of the deliberations of a member of a jury in relation to such a decision, in a proceeding by way of appeal from a judgment, decree, order or sentence of a court,
(b) the operation of a legal or evidential presumption that is not inconsistent with this Act,
(c) a court’s power to dispense with the operation of a rule of evidence or procedure in an interlocutory proceeding.
This section differs from section 9 of the Commonwealth Act. That section preserves the written and unwritten laws of States and Territories in relation to various matters.
This Act does not affect the law relating to the privileges of any Australian Parliament or any House of any Australian Parliament.
In particular, section 15 (2) does not affect, and is in addition to, the law relating to such privileges.
The power of a court to control the conduct of a proceeding is not affected by this Act, except so far as this Act provides otherwise expressly or by necessary intendment.
In particular, the powers of a court with respect to abuse of process in a proceeding are not affected.
This Chapter is about ways in which evidence is adduced.
Part 2.1 is about adducing evidence from witnesses.
Part 2.2 is about adducing documentary evidence.
Part 2.3 is about adducing other forms of evidence.
Except as otherwise provided by this Act—
(a) every person is competent to give evidence, and
(b) a person who is competent to give evidence about a fact is compellable to give that evidence.
A person is not competent to give evidence about a fact if, for any reason (including a mental, intellectual or physical disability)—
(a) the person does not have the capacity to understand a question about the fact, or
(b) the person does not have the capacity to give an answer that can be understood to a question about the fact,
and that incapacity cannot be overcome.
See sections 30 and 31 for examples of assistance that may be provided to enable witnesses to overcome disabilities.
A person who, because of subsection (1), is not competent to give evidence about a fact may be competent to give evidence about other facts.
A person who is competent to give evidence about a fact is not competent to give sworn evidence about the fact if the person does not have the capacity to understand that, in giving evidence, he or she is under an obligation to give truthful evidence.
A person who is not competent to give sworn evidence about a fact may, subject to subsection (5), be competent to give unsworn evidence about the fact.
A person who, because of subsection (3), is not competent to give sworn evidence is competent to give unsworn evidence if the court has told the person—
(a) that it is important to tell the truth, and
(b) that he or she may be asked questions that he or she does not know, or cannot remember, the answer to, and that he or she should tell the court if this occurs, and
(c) that he or she may be asked questions that suggest certain statements are true or untrue and that he or she should agree with the statements that he or she believes are true and should feel no pressure to agree with statements that he or she believes are untrue.
It is presumed, unless the contrary is proved, that a person is not incompetent because of this section.
Evidence that has been given by a witness does not become inadmissible merely because, before the witness finishes giving evidence, he or she dies or ceases to be competent to give evidence.
For the purpose of determining a question arising under this section, the court may inform itself as it thinks fit, including by obtaining information from a person who has relevant specialised knowledge based on the person’s training, study or experience.
A person is not compellable to give evidence on a particular matter if the court is satisfied that—
(a) substantial cost or delay would be incurred in ensuring that the person would have the capacity to understand a question about the matter or to give an answer that can be understood to a question about the matter, and
(b) adequate evidence on that matter has been given, or will be able to be given, from one or more other persons or sources.
None of the following is compellable to give evidence—
(a) the Sovereign,
(b) the Governor-General,
(c) the Governor of a State,
(d) the Administrator of a Territory,
(e) a foreign sovereign or the Head of State of a foreign country.
A member of a House of an Australian Parliament is not compellable to give evidence if the member would, if compelled to give evidence, be prevented from attending—
(a) a sitting of that House, or a joint sitting of that Parliament, or
(b) a meeting of a committee of that House or that Parliament, being a committee of which he or she is a member.
A person who is a judge or juror in a proceeding is not competent to give evidence in that proceeding. However, a juror is competent to give evidence in the proceeding about matters affecting conduct of the proceeding.
A person who is or was a judge in an Australian or overseas proceeding is not compellable to give evidence about that proceeding unless the court gives leave.
This section applies only in a criminal proceeding.
A defendant is not competent to give evidence as a witness for the prosecution.
An associated defendant is not compellable to give evidence for or against a defendant in a criminal proceeding, unless the associated defendant is being tried separately from the defendant.
If a witness is an associated defendant who is being tried jointly with the defendant in the proceeding, the court is to satisfy itself (if there is a jury, in the jury’s absence) that the witness is aware of the effect of subsection (3).
This section applies only in a criminal proceeding.
A person who, when required to give evidence, is the spouse, de facto partner, parent or child of a defendant may object to being required—
(a) to give evidence, or
(b) to give evidence of a communication between the person and the defendant,
as a witness for the prosecution.
The objection is to be made before the person gives the evidence or as soon as practicable after the person becomes aware of the right so to object, whichever is the later.
If it appears to the court that a person may have a right to make an objection under this section, the court is to satisfy itself that the person is aware of the effect of this section as it may apply to the person.
If there is a jury, the court is to hear and determine any objection under this section in the absence of the jury.
A person who makes an objection under this section to giving evidence or giving evidence of a communication must not be required to give the evidence if the court finds that—
(a) there is a likelihood that harm would or might be caused (whether directly or indirectly) to the person, or to the relationship between the person and the defendant, if the person gives the evidence, and
(b) the nature and extent of that harm outweighs the desirability of having the evidence given.
Without limiting the matters that may be taken into account by the court for the purposes of subsection (6), it must take into account the following—
(a) the nature and gravity of the offence for which the defendant is being prosecuted,
(b) the substance and importance of any evidence that the person might give and the weight that is likely to be attached to it,
(c) whether any other evidence concerning the matters to which the evidence of the person would relate is reasonably available to the prosecutor,
(d) the nature of the relationship between the defendant and the person,
(e) whether, in giving the evidence, the person would have to disclose matter that was received by the person in confidence from the defendant.
If an objection under this section has been determined, the prosecutor may not comment on—
(a) the objection, or
(b) the decision of the court in relation to the objection, or
(c) the failure of the person to give evidence.
Section 18 does not apply—
(a) in proceedings for an offence against or referred to in the following provisions of the Children and Young Persons (Care and Protection) Act 1998—
(i), (ii) (Repealed)
(iii) section 227 (Child and young person abuse),
(iv) section 228 (Neglect of children and young persons), or
(b) if the person could be compelled to give evidence in proceedings under section 279 (Compellability of family members to give evidence in certain proceedings) of the Criminal Procedure Act 1986, or
(c) in proceedings for an offence against or referred to in the following provisions of the Children’s Guardian Act 2019—
(i) section 93,
(ii) section 107.
This section differs from section 19 of the Commonwealth Act.
This section applies only in a criminal proceeding for an indictable offence.
The judge or any party (other than the prosecutor) may comment on a failure of the defendant to give evidence. However, unless the comment is made by another defendant in the proceeding, the comment must not suggest that the defendant failed to give evidence because the defendant was, or believed that he or she was, guilty of the offence concerned.
The judge or any party (other than the prosecutor) may comment on a failure to give evidence by a person who, at the time of the failure, was—
(a) the defendant’s spouse or de facto partner, or
(b) a parent or child of the defendant.
However, unless the comment is made by another defendant in the proceeding, a comment of a kind referred to in subsection (3) must not suggest that the spouse, de facto partner, parent or child failed to give evidence because—
(a) the defendant was guilty of the offence concerned, or
(b) the spouse, de facto partner, parent or child believed that the defendant was guilty of the offence concerned.
If—
(a) 2 or more persons are being tried together for an indictable offence, and
(b) comment is made by any of those persons on the failure of any of those persons or of the spouse or de facto partner, or a parent or child, of any of those persons to give evidence,
the judge may, in addition to commenting on the failure to give evidence, comment on any comment of a kind referred to in paragraph (b).
A witness in a proceeding must either take an oath, or make an affirmation, before giving evidence.
Subsection (1) does not apply to a person who gives unsworn evidence under section 13.
A person who is called merely to produce a document or thing to the court need not take an oath or make an affirmation before doing so.
The witness is to take the oath, or make the affirmation, in accordance with the appropriate form in Schedule 1 or in a similar form.
Such an affirmation has the same effect for all purposes as an oath.
A person must either take an oath, or make an affirmation, before acting as an interpreter in a proceeding.
An oath taken, or an affirmation made, by a person before acting as an interpreter on a day is taken for the purposes of subsection (1) to be an oath taken or affirmation made by that person for the purposes of any subsequent proceedings in that court on that day in which the person acts as an interpreter.
The person is to take the oath, or make the affirmation, in accordance with the appropriate form in Schedule 1 or in a similar form.
Such an affirmation has the same effect for all purposes as an oath.
The Commonwealth Act does not include subsection (1A).
A person who is to be a witness or act as an interpreter in a proceeding may choose whether to take an oath or make an affirmation.
The court is to inform the person that he or she has this choice, unless the court is satisfied that the person has already been informed or knows that he or she has the choice.
The court may direct a person who is to be a witness to make an affirmation if—
(a) the person refuses to choose whether to take an oath or make an affirmation, or
(b) it is not reasonably practicable for the person to take an appropriate oath.
Subsection (2) differs from section 23 of the Commonwealth Act.
It is not necessary that a religious text be used in taking an oath.
An oath is effective for the purposes of this Division even if the person who took it—
(a) did not have a religious belief or did not have a religious belief of a particular kind, or
(b) did not understand the nature and consequences of the oath.
A person may take an oath even if the person’s religious or spiritual beliefs do not include a belief in the existence of a god.
Despite anything to the contrary in this Act, the form of oath taken by a person—
(a) need not include a reference to a god, and
(b) may instead refer to the basis of the person’s beliefs in accordance with a form prescribed by the regulations.
The Commonwealth Act does not include an equivalent provision to section 24A.
* * * * *
The Commonwealth Act includes a provision preserving any right of a defendant under the law of a State or Territory to make an unsworn statement. The right to make an unsworn statement remains in Norfolk Island.
The court may make such orders as it considers just in relation to—
(a) the way in which witnesses are to be questioned, and
(b) the production and use of documents and things in connection with the questioning of witnesses, and
(c) the order in which parties may question a witness, and
(d) the presence and behaviour of any person in connection with the questioning of witnesses.
A party may question any witness, except as provided by this Act.
Unless the court otherwise directs—
(a) cross-examination of a witness is not to take place before the examination in chief of the witness, and
(b) re-examination of a witness is not to take place before all other parties who wish to do so have cross-examined the witness.
A party may question a witness in any way the party thinks fit, except as provided by this Chapter or as directed by the court.
A court may, on its own motion or on the application of the party that called the witness, direct that the witness give evidence wholly or partly in narrative form.
Such a direction may include directions about the way in which evidence is to be given in that form.
Evidence may be given in the form of charts, summaries or other explanatory material if it appears to the court that the material would be likely to aid its comprehension of other evidence that has been given or is to be given.
A witness may give evidence about a fact through an interpreter unless the witness can understand and speak the English language sufficiently to enable the witness to understand, and to make an adequate reply to, questions that may be put about the fact.
A witness who cannot hear adequately may be questioned in any appropriate way.
A witness who cannot speak adequately may give evidence by any appropriate means.
The court may give directions concerning either or both of the following—
(a) the way in which a witness may be questioned under subsection (1),
(b) the means by which a witness may give evidence under subsection (2).
This section does not affect the right of a witness to whom this section applies to give evidence about a fact through an interpreter under section 30.
A witness must not, in the course of giving evidence, use a document to try to revive his or her memory about a fact or opinion unless the court gives leave.
Without limiting the matters that the court may take into account in deciding whether to give leave, it is to take into account—
(a) whether the witness will be able to recall the fact or opinion adequately without using the document, and
(b) whether so much of the document as the witness proposes to use is, or is a copy of, a document that—
(i) was written or made by the witness when the events recorded in it were fresh in his or her memory, or
(ii) was, at such a time, found by the witness to be accurate.
If a witness has, while giving evidence, used a document to try to revive his or her memory about a fact or opinion, the witness may, with the leave of the court, read aloud, as part of his or her evidence, so much of the document as relates to that fact or opinion.
The court is, on the request of a party, to give such directions as the court thinks fit to ensure that so much of the document as relates to the proceeding is produced to that party.
Despite section 32, in any criminal proceeding, a police officer may give evidence in chief for the prosecution by reading or being led through a written statement previously made by the police officer.
Evidence may not be so given unless—
(a) the statement was made by the police officer at the time of or soon after the occurrence of the events to which it refers, and
(b) the police officer signed the statement when it was made, and
(c) a copy of the statement had been given to the person charged or to his or her Australian legal practitioner or legal counsel a reasonable time before the hearing of the evidence for the prosecution.
A reference in this section to a police officer includes a reference to a person who, at the time the statement concerned was made, was a police officer.
The court may, on the request of a party, give such directions as are appropriate to ensure that specified documents and things used by a witness otherwise than while giving evidence to try to revive his or her memory are produced to the party for the purposes of the proceeding.
The court may refuse to admit the evidence given by the witness so far as it concerns a fact as to which the witness so tried to revive his or her memory if, without reasonable excuse, the directions have not been complied with.
A party is not to be required to tender a document only because the party, whether under this Act or otherwise—
(a) called for the document to be produced to the party, or
(b) inspected it when it was so produced.
The party who produces a document so called for is not entitled to tender it only because the party to whom it was produced, or who inspected it, fails to tender it.
The court may order a person who—
(a) is present at the hearing of a proceeding, and
(b) is compellable to give evidence in the proceeding,
to give evidence and to produce documents or things even if a subpoena or other process requiring the person to attend for that purpose has not been duly served on the person.
A person so ordered to give evidence or to produce documents or things is subject to the same penalties and liabilities as if the person had been duly served with such a subpoena or other process.
A party who inspects a document or thing produced to the court because of subsection (1) need not use the document in evidence.
A leading question must not be put to a witness in examination in chief or in re-examination unless—
(a) the court gives leave, or
(b) the question relates to a matter introductory to the witness’s evidence, or
(c) no objection is made to the question and (leaving aside the party conducting the examination in chief or re-examination) each other party to the proceeding is represented by an Australian legal practitioner, legal counsel or prosecutor, or
(d) the question relates to a matter that is not in dispute, or
(e) if the witness has specialised knowledge based on the witness’s training, study or experience—the question is asked for the purpose of obtaining the witness’s opinion about a hypothetical statement of facts, being facts in respect of which evidence has been, or is intended to be, given.
Unless the court otherwise directs, subsection (1) does not apply in civil proceedings to a question that relates to an investigation, inspection or report that the witness made in the course of carrying out public or official duties.
Subsection (1) does not prevent a court from exercising power under rules of court to allow a written statement or report to be tendered or treated as evidence in chief of its maker.
A party who called a witness may, with the leave of the court, question the witness, as though the party were cross-examining the witness, about—
(a) evidence given by the witness that is unfavourable to the party, or
(b) a matter of which the witness may reasonably be supposed to have knowledge and about which it appears to the court the witness is not, in examination in chief, making a genuine attempt to give evidence, or
(c) whether the witness has, at any time, made a prior inconsistent statement.
Questioning a witness under this section is taken to be cross-examination for the purposes of this Act (other than section 39).
The party questioning the witness under this section may, with the leave of the court, question the witness about matters relevant only to the witness’s credibility.
The rules about admissibility of evidence relevant only to credibility are set out in Part 3.7.
Questioning under this section is to take place before the other parties cross-examine the witness, unless the court otherwise directs.
If the court so directs, the order in which the parties question the witness is to be as the court directs.
Without limiting the matters that the court may take into account in determining whether to give leave or a direction under this section, it is to take into account—
(a) whether the party gave notice at the earliest opportunity of his or her intention to seek leave, and
(b) the matters on which, and the extent to which, the witness has been, or is likely to be, questioned by another party.
A party is subject to the same liability to be cross-examined under this section as any other witness if—
(a) a proceeding is being conducted in the name of the party by or on behalf of an insurer or other person, and
(b) the party is a witness in the proceeding.
On re-examination—
(a) a witness may be questioned about matters arising out of evidence given by the witness in cross-examination, and
(b) other questions may not be put to the witness unless the court gives leave.
A party is not to cross-examine a witness who has been called in error by another party and has not been questioned by that other party about a matter relevant to a question to be determined in the proceeding.
The court must disallow a question put to a witness in cross-examination, or inform the witness that it need not be answered, if the court is of the opinion that the question (referred to as a
(a) is misleading or confusing, or
(b) is unduly annoying, harassing, intimidating, offensive, oppressive, humiliating or repetitive, or
(c) is put to the witness in a manner or tone that is belittling, insulting or otherwise inappropriate, or
(d) has no basis other than a stereotype (for example, a stereotype based on the witness’s sex, race, culture, ethnicity, age or mental, intellectual or physical disability).
Without limiting the matters the court may take into account for the purposes of subsection (1), it is to take into account—
(a) any relevant condition or characteristic of the witness of which the court is, or is made, aware, including age, education, ethnic and cultural background, gender, language background and skills, level of maturity and understanding and personality, and
(b) any mental, intellectual or physical disability of which the court is, or is made, aware and to which the witness is, or appears to be, subject, and
(c) the context in which the question is put, including—
(i) the nature of the proceeding, and
(ii) in a criminal proceeding—the nature of the offence to which the proceeding relates, and
(iii) the relationship (if any) between the witness and any other party to the proceeding.
A question is not a disallowable question merely because—
(a) the question challenges the truthfulness of the witness or the consistency or accuracy of any statement made by the witness, or
(b) the question requires the witness to discuss a subject that could be considered distasteful to, or private by, the witness.
A party may object to a question put to a witness on the ground that it is a disallowable question.
However, the duty imposed on the court by this section applies whether or not an objection is raised to a particular question.
A failure by the court to disallow a question under this section, or to inform the witness that it need not be answered, does not affect the admissibility in evidence of any answer given by the witness in response to the question.
A person must not, without the express permission of a court, print or publish any question that the court has disallowed under this section—see section 195.
A party may put a leading question to a witness in cross-examination unless the court disallows the question or directs the witness not to answer it.
Without limiting the matters that the court may take into account in deciding whether to disallow the question or give such a direction, it is to take into account the extent to which—
(a) evidence that has been given by the witness in examination in chief is unfavourable to the party who called the witness, and
(b) the witness has an interest consistent with an interest of the cross-examiner, and
(c) the witness is sympathetic to the party conducting the cross-examination, either generally or about a particular matter, and
(d) the witness’s age, or any mental, intellectual or physical disability to which the witness is subject, may affect the witness’s answers.
The court is to disallow the question, or direct the witness not to answer it, if the court is satisfied that the facts concerned would be better ascertained if leading questions were not used.
This section does not limit the court’s power to control leading questions.
A witness may be cross-examined about a prior inconsistent statement alleged to have been made by the witness whether or not—
(a) complete particulars of the statement have been given to the witness, or
(b) a document containing a record of the statement has been shown to the witness.
If, in cross-examination, a witness does not admit that he or she has made a prior inconsistent statement, the cross-examiner is not to adduce evidence of the statement otherwise than from the witness unless, in the cross-examination, the cross-examiner—
(a) informed the witness of enough of the circumstances of the making of the statement to enable the witness to identify the statement, and
(b) drew the witness’s attention to so much of the statement as is inconsistent with the witness’s evidence.
For the purpose of adducing evidence of the statement, a party may re-open the party’s case.
Except as provided by this section, a cross-examiner must not question a witness about a previous representation alleged to have been made by a person other than the witness.
A cross-examiner may question a witness about the representation and its contents if—
(a) evidence of the representation has been admitted, or
(b) the court is satisfied that it will be admitted.
If subsection (2) does not apply and the representation is contained in a document, the document may only be used to question a witness as follows—
(a) the document must be produced to the witness,
(b) if the document is a tape recording, or any other kind of document from which sounds are reproduced—the witness must be provided with the means (for example, headphones) to listen to the contents of the document without other persons present at the cross-examination hearing those contents,
(c) the witness must be asked whether, having examined (or heard) the contents of the document, the witness stands by the evidence that he or she has given,
(d) neither the cross-examiner nor the witness is to identify the document or disclose any of its contents.
A document that is so used may be marked for identification.
This section applies if a party is cross-examining or has cross-examined a witness about—
(a) a prior inconsistent statement alleged to have been made by the witness that is recorded in a document, or
(b) a previous representation alleged to have been made by another person that is recorded in a document.
If the court so orders or if another party so requires, the party must produce—
(a) the document, or
(b) such evidence of the contents of the document as is available to the party,
to the court or to that other party.
The court may—
(a) examine a document or evidence that has been so produced, and
(b) give directions as to its use, and
(c) admit it even if it has not been tendered by a party.
Subsection (3) does not permit the court to admit a document or evidence that is not admissible because of Chapter 3.
The mere production of a document to a witness who is being cross-examined does not give rise to a requirement that the cross-examiner tender the document.
The court may give leave to a party to recall a witness to give evidence about a matter raised by evidence adduced by another party, being a matter on which the witness was not cross-examined, if the evidence concerned has been admitted and—
(a) it contradicts evidence about the matter given by the witness in examination in chief, or
(b) the witness could have given evidence about the matter in examination in chief.
A reference in this section to a matter raised by evidence adduced by another party includes a reference to an inference drawn from, or that the party intends to draw from, that evidence.
A reference in this Part to a
A reference in this Part to a copy of a document in question includes a reference to a document that is not an exact copy of the document in question but that is identical to the document in question in all relevant respects.
A party may adduce evidence of the contents of a document in question by tendering the document in question or by any one or more of the following methods—
(a) adducing evidence of an admission made by another party to the proceeding as to the contents of the document in question,
(b) tendering a document that—
(i) is or purports to be a copy of the document in question, and
(ii) has been produced, or purports to have been produced, by a device that reproduces the contents of documents,
(c) if the document in question is an article or thing by which words are recorded in such a way as to be capable of being reproduced as sound, or in which words are recorded in a code (including shorthand writing)—tendering a document that is or purports to be a transcript of the words,
(d) if the document in question is an article or thing on or in which information is stored in such a way that it cannot be used by the court unless a device is used to retrieve, produce or collate it—tendering a document that was or purports to have been produced by use of the device,
(e) tendering a document that—
(i) forms part of the records of or kept by a business (whether or not the business is still in existence), and
(ii) is or purports to be a copy of, or an extract from or a summary of, the document in question, or is or purports to be a copy of such an extract or summary,
(f) if the document in question is a public document—tendering a document that is or purports to be a copy of the document in question and that is or purports to have been printed—
(i) by a person authorised by or on behalf of the government to print the document or by the Government Printer of the Commonwealth or by the government or official printer of another State or a Territory, or
(ii) by the authority of the Government or administration of the State, the Commonwealth, another State, a Territory or a foreign country, or
(iii) by authority of an Australian Parliament, a House of an Australian Parliament, a committee of such a House or a committee of an Australian Parliament.
Subsection (1) applies to a document in question whether the document in question is available to the party or not.
If the party adduces evidence of the contents of a document under subsection (1) (a), the evidence may only be used—
(a) in respect of the party’s case against the other party who made the admission concerned, or
(b) in respect of the other party’s case against the party who adduced the evidence in that way.
A party may adduce evidence of the contents of a document in question that is not available to the party, or the existence and contents of which are not in issue in the proceeding, by—
(a) tendering a document that is a copy of, or an extract from or summary of, the document in question, or
(b) adducing from a witness evidence of the contents of the document in question.
Clause 5 of Part 2 of the Dictionary is about the availability of documents.
Section 182 of the Commonwealth Act gives section 48 of the Commonwealth Act a wider application in relation to Commonwealth records and certain Commonwealth documents.
No paragraph of section 48 (1) (other than paragraph (a)) applies to a document that is in a foreign country unless—
(a) the party who adduces evidence of the contents of the document in question has, not less than 28 days (or such other period as may be prescribed by the regulations or by rules of court) before the day on which the evidence is adduced, served on each other party a copy of the document proposed to be tendered, or
(b) the court directs that it is to apply.
Section 182 of the Commonwealth Act gives section 49 of the Commonwealth Act a wider application in relation to Commonwealth records and certain Commonwealth documents.
The court may, on the application of a party, direct that the party may adduce evidence of the contents of 2 or more documents in question in the form of a summary if the court is satisfied that it would not otherwise be possible conveniently to examine the evidence because of the volume or complexity of the documents in question.
The court may only make such a direction if the party seeking to adduce the evidence in the form of a summary has—
(a) served on each other party a copy of the summary that discloses the name and address of the person who prepared the summary, and
(b) given each other party a reasonable opportunity to examine or copy the documents in question.
The opinion rule does not apply to evidence adduced in accordance with a direction under this section.
The principles and rules of the common law that relate to the means of proving the contents of documents are abolished.
Section 182 of the Commonwealth Act gives the provisions of Part 2.2 of the Commonwealth Act a wider application in relation to Commonwealth records and certain Commonwealth documents.
This Act (other than this Part) does not affect the operation of any Australian law or rule of practice so far as it permits evidence to be adduced in a way other than by witnesses giving evidence or documents being tendered in evidence.
A judge may, on application, order that a demonstration, experiment or inspection be held.
A judge is not to make an order unless he or she is satisfied that—
(a) the parties will be given a reasonable opportunity to be present, and
(b) the judge and, if there is a jury, the jury will be present.
Without limiting the matters that the judge may take into account in deciding whether to make an order, the judge is to take into account the following—
(a) whether the parties will be present,
(b) whether the demonstration, experiment or inspection will, in the court’s opinion, assist the court in resolving issues of fact or understanding the evidence,
(c) the danger that the demonstration, experiment or inspection might be unfairly prejudicial, might be misleading or confusing or might cause or result in undue waste of time,
(d) in the case of a demonstration—the extent to which the demonstration will properly reproduce the conduct or event to be demonstrated,
(e) in the case of an inspection—the extent to which the place or thing to be inspected has materially altered.
The court (including, if there is a jury, the jury) is not to conduct an experiment in the course of its deliberations.
This section does not apply in relation to the inspection of an exhibit by the court or, if there is a jury, by the jury.
The court (including, if there is a jury, the jury) may draw any reasonable inference from what it sees, hears or otherwise notices during a demonstration, experiment or inspection.
This Chapter is about whether evidence adduced in a proceeding is admissible.
Part 3.1 sets out the general inclusionary rule that relevant evidence is admissible.
Part 3.2 is about the exclusion of hearsay evidence, and exceptions to the hearsay rule.
Part 3.3 is about exclusion of opinion evidence, and exceptions to the opinion rule.
Part 3.4 is about admissions and the extent to which they are admissible as exceptions to the hearsay rule and the opinion rule.
Part 3.5 is about exclusion of certain evidence of judgments and convictions.
Part 3.6 is about exclusion of evidence of tendency or coincidence, and exceptions to the tendency rule and the coincidence rule.
Part 3.7 is about exclusion of evidence relevant only to credibility, and exceptions to the credibility rule.
Part 3.8 is about character evidence and the extent to which it is admissible as exceptions to the hearsay rule, the opinion rule, the tendency rule and the credibility rule.
Part 3.9 is about the requirements that must be satisfied before identification evidence is admissible.
Part 3.10 is about the various categories of privilege that may prevent evidence being adduced.
Part 3.11 provides for the discretionary and mandatory exclusion of evidence even if it would otherwise be admissible.
The following diagram shows how this Chapter applies to particular evidence—
The evidence that is relevant in a proceeding is evidence that, if it were accepted, could rationally affect (directly or indirectly) the assessment of the probability of the existence of a fact in issue in the proceeding.
In particular, evidence is not taken to be irrelevant only because it relates only to—
(a) the credibility of a witness, or
(b) the admissibility of other evidence, or
(c) a failure to adduce evidence.
Except as otherwise provided by this Act, evidence that is relevant in a proceeding is admissible in the proceeding.
Evidence that is not relevant in the proceeding is not admissible.
If the determination of the question whether evidence adduced by a party is relevant depends on the court making another finding (including a finding that the evidence is what the party claims it to be), the court may find that the evidence is relevant—
(a) if it is reasonably open to make that finding, or
(b) subject to further evidence being admitted at a later stage of the proceeding that will make it reasonably open to make that finding.
Without limiting subsection (1), if the relevance of evidence of an act done by a person depends on the court making a finding that the person and one or more other persons had, or were acting in furtherance of, a common purpose (whether to effect an unlawful conspiracy or otherwise), the court may use the evidence itself in determining whether the common purpose existed.
If a question arises as to the relevance of a document or thing, the court may examine it and may draw any reasonable inference from it, including an inference as to its authenticity or identity.
Subsection (1) does not limit the matters from which inferences may properly be drawn.
Evidence of a previous representation made by a person is not admissible to prove the existence of a fact that it can reasonably be supposed that the person intended to assert by the representation.
Such a fact is in this Part referred to as an
For the purposes of determining under subsection (1) whether it can reasonably be supposed that the person intended to assert a particular fact by the representation, the court may have regard to the circumstances in which the representation was made.
Subsection (2A) was inserted as a response to the decision of the Supreme Court of NSW in R v Hannes(2000) 158 FLR 359.
Subsection (1) does not apply to evidence of a representation contained in a certificate or other document given or made under regulations made under an Act other than this Act to the extent to which the regulations provide that the certificate or other document has evidentiary effect.
Specific exceptions to the hearsay rule are as follows—
• evidence relevant for a non-hearsay purpose (section 60),
• first-hand hearsay—
— civil proceedings, if the maker of the representation is unavailable (section 63) or available (section 64)
— criminal proceedings, if the maker of the representation is unavailable (section 65) or available (section 66)
• contemporaneous statements about a person’s health etc (section 66A)
• business records (section 69)
• tags and labels (section 70)
• electronic communications (section 71)
• Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander traditional laws and customs (section 72)
• marriage, family history or family relationships (section 73)
• public or general rights (section 74)
• use of evidence in interlocutory proceedings (section 75)
• admissions (section 81)
• representations about employment or authority (section 87 (2))
• exceptions to the rule excluding evidence of judgments and convictions (section 92 (3))
• character of and expert opinion about accused persons (sections 110 and 111).
Other provisions of this Act, or of other laws, may operate as further exceptions.
1 D is the defendant in a sexual assault trial. W has made a statement to the police that X told W that X had seen D leave a night club with the victim shortly before the sexual assault is alleged to have occurred. Unless an exception to the hearsay rule applies, evidence of what X told W cannot be given at the trial.
2 P had told W that the handbrake on W’s car did not work. Unless an exception to the hearsay rule applies, evidence of that statement cannot be given by P, W or anyone else to prove that the handbrake was defective.
3 W had bought a video cassette recorder and written down its serial number on a document. Unless an exception to the hearsay rule applies, the document is inadmissible to prove that a video cassette recorder later found in D’s possession was the video cassette recorder bought by W.
The hearsay rule does not apply to evidence of a previous representation that is admitted because it is relevant for a purpose other than proof of an asserted fact.
This section applies whether or not the person who made the representation had personal knowledge of the asserted fact (within the meaning of section 62 (2)).
Subsection (2) was inserted as a response to the decision of the High Court of Australia in Lee v The Queen(1998) 195 CLR 594.
However, this section does not apply in a criminal proceeding to evidence of an admission.
The admission might still be admissible under section 81 as an exception to the hearsay rule if it is “first-hand” hearsay: see section 82.
This Part does not enable use of a previous representation to prove the existence of an asserted fact if, when the representation was made, the person who made it was not competent to give evidence about the fact because of section 13 (1).
This section does not apply to a contemporaneous representation made by a person about his or her health, feelings, sensations, intention, knowledge or state of mind.
For the admissibility of such contemporaneous representations, see section 66A.
For the purposes of this section, it is presumed, unless the contrary is proved, that when the representation was made the person who made it was competent to give evidence about the asserted fact.
A reference in this Division (other than in subsection (2)) to a previous representation is a reference to a previous representation that was made by a person who had personal knowledge of an asserted fact.
A person has personal knowledge of the asserted fact if his or her knowledge of the fact was, or might reasonably be supposed to have been, based on something that the person saw, heard or otherwise perceived, other than a previous representation made by another person about the fact.
For the purposes of section 66A, a person has personal knowledge of the asserted fact if it is a fact about the person’s health, feelings, sensations, intention, knowledge or state of mind at the time the representation referred to in that section was made.
This section applies in a civil proceeding if a person who made a previous representation is not available to give evidence about an asserted fact.
The hearsay rule does not apply to—
(a) evidence of the representation that is given by a person who saw, heard or otherwise perceived the representation being made, or
(b) a document so far as it contains the representation, or another representation to which it is reasonably necessary to refer in order to understand the representation.
Section 67 imposes notice requirements relating to this subsection.
Clause 4 of Part 2 of the Dictionary is about the availability of persons.
This section applies in a civil proceeding if a person who made a previous representation is available to give evidence about an asserted fact.
The hearsay rule does not apply to—
(a) evidence of the representation that is given by a person who saw, heard or otherwise perceived the representation being made, or
(b) a document so far as it contains the representation, or another representation to which it is reasonably necessary to refer in order to understand the representation,
if it would cause undue expense or undue delay, or would not be reasonably practicable, to call the person who made the representation to give evidence.
Section 67 imposes notice requirements relating to this subsection. Section 68 is about objections to notices that relate to this subsection.
If the person who made the representation has been or is to be called to give evidence, the hearsay rule does not apply to evidence of the representation that is given by—
(a) that person, or
(b) a person who saw, heard or otherwise perceived the representation being made.
A document containing a representation to which subsection (3) applies must not be tendered before the conclusion of the examination in chief of the person who made the representation, unless the court gives leave.
Clause 4 of Part 2 of the Dictionary is about the availability of persons.
This section applies in a criminal proceeding if a person who made a previous representation is not available to give evidence about an asserted fact.
The hearsay rule does not apply to evidence of a previous representation that is given by a person who saw, heard or otherwise perceived the representation being made, if the representation—
(a) was made under a duty to make that representation or to make representations of that kind, or
(b) was made when or shortly after the asserted fact occurred and in circumstances that make it unlikely that the representation is a fabrication, or
(c) was made in circumstances that make it highly probable that the representation is reliable, or
(d) was—
(i) against the interests of the person who made it at the time it was made, and
(ii) made in circumstances that make it likely that the representation is reliable.
Section 67 imposes notice requirements relating to this subsection.
The hearsay rule does not apply to evidence of a previous representation made in the course of giving evidence in an Australian or overseas proceeding if, in that proceeding, the defendant in the proceeding to which this section is being applied—
(a) cross-examined the person who made the representation about it, or
(b) had a reasonable opportunity to cross-examine the person who made the representation about it.
Section 67 imposes notice requirements relating to this subsection.
If there is more than one defendant in the criminal proceeding, evidence of a previous representation that—
(a) is given in an Australian or overseas proceeding, and
(b) is admitted into evidence in the criminal proceeding because of subsection (3),
cannot be used against a defendant who did not cross-examine, and did not have a reasonable opportunity to cross-examine, the person about the representation.
For the purposes of subsections (3) and (4), a defendant is taken to have had a reasonable opportunity to cross-examine a person if the defendant was not present at a time when the cross-examination of a person might have been conducted but—
(a) could reasonably have been present at that time, and
(b) if present could have cross-examined the person.
Evidence of the making of a representation to which subsection (3) applies may be adduced by producing a transcript, or a recording, of the representation that is authenticated by—
(a) the person to whom, or the court or other body to which, the representation was made, or
(b) if applicable, the registrar or other proper officer of the court or other body to which the representation was made, or
(c) the person or body responsible for producing the transcript or recording.
Without limiting subsection (2) (d), a representation is taken for the purposes of that subsection to be against the interests of the person who made it if it tends—
(a) to damage the person’s reputation, or
(b) to show that the person has committed an offence for which the person has not been convicted, or
(c) to show that the person is liable in an action for damages.
The hearsay rule does not apply to—
(a) evidence of a previous representation adduced by a defendant if the evidence is given by a person who saw, heard or otherwise perceived the representation being made, or
(b) a document tendered as evidence by a defendant so far as it contains a previous representation, or another representation to which it is reasonably necessary to refer in order to understand the representation.
Section 67 imposes notice requirements relating to this subsection.
If evidence of a previous representation about a matter has been adduced by a defendant and has been admitted, the hearsay rule does not apply to evidence of another representation about the matter that—
(a) is adduced by another party, and
(b) is given by a person who saw, heard or otherwise perceived the other representation being made.
Clause 4 of Part 2 of the Dictionary is about the availability of persons.
This section applies in a criminal proceeding if a person who made a previous representation is available to give evidence about an asserted fact.
If that person has been or is to be called to give evidence, the hearsay rule does not apply to evidence of the representation that is given by—
(a) that person, or
(b) a person who saw, heard or otherwise perceived the representation being made,
if, when the representation was made, the occurrence of the asserted fact was fresh in the memory of the person who made the representation.
In determining whether the occurrence of the asserted fact was fresh in the memory of a person, the court may take into account all matters that it considers are relevant to the question, including—
(a) the nature of the event concerned, and
(b) the age and health of the person, and
(c) the period of time between the occurrence of the asserted fact and the making of the representation.
Subsection (2A) was inserted as a response to the decision of the High Court of Australia in Graham v The Queen(1998) 195 CLR 606.
If a representation was made for the purpose of indicating the evidence that the person who made it would be able to give in an Australian or overseas proceeding, subsection (2) does not apply to evidence adduced by the prosecutor of the representation unless the representation concerns the identity of a person, place or thing.
A document containing a representation to which subsection (2) applies must not be tendered before the conclusion of the examination in chief of the person who made the representation, unless the court gives leave.
Clause 4 of Part 2 of the Dictionary is about the availability of persons.
The hearsay rule does not apply to evidence of a previous representation made by a person if the representation was a contemporaneous representation about the person’s health, feelings, sensations, intention, knowledge or state of mind.
Sections 63 (2), 64 (2) and 65 (2), (3) and (8) do not apply to evidence adduced by a party unless that party has given reasonable notice in writing to each other party of the party’s intention to adduce the evidence.
Notices given under subsection (1) are to be given in accordance with any regulations or rules of court made for the purposes of this section.
The notice must state—
(a) the particular provisions of this Division on which the party intends to rely in arguing that the hearsay rule does not apply to the evidence, and
(b) if section 64 (2) is such a provision—the grounds, specified in that provision, on which the party intends to rely.
Despite subsection (1), if notice has not been given, the court may, on the application of a party, direct that one or more of those subsections is to apply despite the party’s failure to give notice.
The direction—
(a) is subject to such conditions (if any) as the court thinks fit, and
(b) in particular, may provide that, in relation to specified evidence, the subsection or subsections concerned apply with such modifications as the court specifies.
In a civil proceeding, if the notice discloses that it is not intended to call the person who made the previous representation concerned because it—
(a) would cause undue expense or undue delay, or
(b) would not be reasonably practicable,
a party may, not later than 21 days after notice has been given, object to the tender of the evidence, or of a specified part of the evidence.
The objection is to be made by giving to each other party a written notice setting out the grounds on which the objection is made.
The court may, on the application of a party, determine the objection at or before the hearing.
If the objection is unreasonable, the court may order that, in any event, the party objecting is to bear the costs incurred by another party—
(a) in relation to the objection, and
(b) in calling the person who made the representation to give evidence.
This subsection differs from section 68 (4) of the Commonwealth Act because of the different way costs are ascertained by NSW courts.
This section applies to a document that—
(a) either—
(i) is or forms part of the records belonging to or kept by a person, body or organisation in the course of, or for the purposes of, a business, or
(ii) at any time was or formed part of such a record, and
(b) contains a previous representation made or recorded in the document in the course of, or for the purposes of, the business.
The hearsay rule does not apply to the document (so far as it contains the representation) if the representation was made—
(a) by a person who had or might reasonably be supposed to have had personal knowledge of the asserted fact, or
(b) on the basis of information directly or indirectly supplied by a person who had or might reasonably be supposed to have had personal knowledge of the asserted fact.
Subsection (2) does not apply if the representation—
(a) was prepared or obtained for the purpose of conducting, or for or in contemplation of or in connection with, an Australian or overseas proceeding, or
(b) was made in connection with an investigation relating or leading to a criminal proceeding.
If—
(a) the occurrence of an event of a particular kind is in question, and
(b) in the course of a business, a system has been followed of making and keeping a record of the occurrence of all events of that kind,
the hearsay rule does not apply to evidence that tends to prove that there is no record kept, in accordance with that system, of the occurrence of the event.
For the purposes of this section, a person is taken to have had personal knowledge of a fact if the person’s knowledge of the fact was or might reasonably be supposed to have been based on what the person saw, heard or otherwise perceived (other than a previous representation made by a person about the fact).
Sections 48, 49, 50, 146, 147 and 150 (1) are relevant to the mode of proof, and authentication, of business records.
Section 182 of the Commonwealth Act gives section 69 of the Commonwealth Act a wider application in relation to Commonwealth records.
The hearsay rule does not apply to a tag or label attached to, or writing placed on, an object (including a document) if the tag or label or writing may reasonably be supposed to have been so attached or placed—
(a) in the course of a business, and
(b) for the purpose of describing or stating the identity, nature, ownership, destination, origin or weight of the object, or of the contents (if any) of the object.
The Commonwealth Act has an additional subsection. It provides that the exception does not apply to Customs and Excise prosecutions. Section 5 of the Commonwealth Act extends the application of that subsection to proceedings in all Australian courts.
The hearsay rule does not apply to a representation contained in a document recording an electronic communication so far as the representation is a representation as to—
(a) the identity of the person from whom or on whose behalf the communication was sent, or
(b) the date on which or the time at which the communication was sent, or
(c) the destination of the communication or the identity of the person to whom the communication was addressed.
Division 3 of Part 4.3 contains presumptions about electronic communications.
Section 182 of the Commonwealth Act gives section 71 of the Commonwealth Act a wider application in relation to Commonwealth records.
The hearsay rule does not apply to evidence of a representation about the existence or non-existence, or the content, of the traditional laws and customs of an Aboriginal or Torres Strait Islander group.
The hearsay rule does not apply to evidence of reputation concerning—
(a) whether a person was, at a particular time or at any time, a married person, or
(b) whether 2 people cohabiting at a particular time were married to each other at that time, or
(c) a person’s age, or
(d) family history or a family relationship.
In a criminal proceeding, subsection (1) does not apply to evidence adduced by a defendant unless—
(a) it tends to contradict evidence of a kind referred to in subsection (1) that has been admitted, or
(b) the defendant has given reasonable notice in writing to each other party of the defendant’s intention to adduce the evidence.
In a criminal proceeding, subsection (1) does not apply to evidence adduced by the prosecutor unless it tends to contradict evidence of a kind referred to in subsection (1) that has been admitted.
The hearsay rule does not apply to evidence of reputation concerning the existence, nature or extent of a public or general right.
In a criminal proceeding, subsection (1) does not apply to evidence adduced by the prosecutor unless it tends to contradict evidence of a kind referred to in subsection (1) that has been admitted.
In an interlocutory proceeding, the hearsay rule does not apply to evidence if the party who adduces it also adduces evidence of its source.
Evidence of an opinion is not admissible to prove the existence of a fact about the existence of which the opinion was expressed.
Subsection (1) does not apply to evidence of an opinion contained in a certificate or other document given or made under regulations made under an Act other than this Act to the extent to which the regulations provide that the certificate or other document has evidentiary effect.
Specific exceptions to the opinion rule are as follows—
• summaries of voluminous or complex documents (section 50 (3))
• evidence relevant otherwise than as opinion evidence (section 77)
• lay opinion (section 78)
• Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander traditional laws and customs (section 78A)
• expert opinion (section 79)
• admissions (section 81)
• exceptions to the rule excluding evidence of judgments and convictions (section 92 (3))
• character of and expert opinion about accused persons (sections 110 and 111).
Other provisions of this Act, or of other laws, may operate as further exceptions.
1 P sues D, her doctor, for the negligent performance of a surgical operation. Unless an exception to the opinion rule applies, P’s neighbour, W, who had the same operation, cannot give evidence of his opinion that D had not performed the operation as well as his own.
2 P considers that electrical work that D, an electrician, has done for her is unsatisfactory. Unless an exception to the opinion rule applies, P cannot give evidence of her opinion that D does not have the necessary skills to do electrical work.
The opinion rule does not apply to evidence of an opinion that is admitted because it is relevant for a purpose other than proof of the existence of a fact about the existence of which the opinion was expressed.
The opinion rule does not apply to evidence of an opinion expressed by a person if—
(a) the opinion is based on what the person saw, heard or otherwise perceived about a matter or event, and
(b) evidence of the opinion is necessary to obtain an adequate account or understanding of the person’s perception of the matter or event.
The opinion rule does not apply to evidence of an opinion expressed by a member of an Aboriginal or Torres Strait Islander group about the existence or non-existence, or the content, of the traditional laws and customs of the group.
If a person has specialised knowledge based on the person’s training, study or experience, the opinion rule does not apply to evidence of an opinion of that person that is wholly or substantially based on that knowledge.
To avoid doubt, and without limiting subsection (1)—
(a) a reference in that subsection to specialised knowledge includes a reference to specialised knowledge of child development and child behaviour (including specialised knowledge of the impact of sexual abuse on children and their development and behaviour during and following the abuse), and
(b) a reference in that subsection to an opinion of a person includes, if the person has specialised knowledge of the kind referred to in paragraph (a), a reference to an opinion relating to either or both of the following—
(i) the development and behaviour of children generally,
(ii) the development and behaviour of children who have been victims of sexual offences, or offences similar to sexual offences.
Evidence of an opinion is not inadmissible only because it is about—
(a) a fact in issue or an ultimate issue, or
(b) a matter of common knowledge.
The hearsay rule and the opinion rule do not apply to evidence of an admission.
The hearsay rule and the opinion rule do not apply to evidence of a previous representation—
(a) that was made in relation to an admission at the time the admission was made, or shortly before or after that time, and
(b) to which it is reasonably necessary to refer in order to understand the admission.
Specific exclusionary rules relating to admissions are as follows—
• evidence of admissions that is not first-hand (section 82)
• use of admissions against third parties (section 83)
• admissions influenced by violence and certain other conduct (section 84)
• unreliable admissions of accused persons (section 85)
• records of oral questioning of accused persons (section 86)
• D admits to W, his best friend, that he sexually assaulted V. In D’s trial for the sexual assault, the prosecution may lead evidence from W—
(a) that D made the admission to W as proof of the truth of that admission, and
(b) that W formed the opinion that D was sane when he made the admission.
Section 81 does not prevent the application of the hearsay rule to evidence of an admission unless—
(a) it is given by a person who saw, heard or otherwise perceived the admission being made, or
(b) it is a document in which the admission is made.
Section 60 does not apply in a criminal proceeding to evidence of an admission.
Section 81 does not prevent the application of the hearsay rule or the opinion rule to evidence of an admission in respect of the case of a third party.
The evidence may be used in respect of the case of a third party if that party consents.
Consent cannot be given in respect of part only of the evidence.
In this section—
(a) made the admission, or
(b) adduced the evidence.
Evidence of an admission is not admissible unless the court is satisfied that the admission, and the making of the admission, were not influenced by—
(a) violent, oppressive, inhuman or degrading conduct, whether towards the person who made the admission or towards another person, or
(b) a threat of conduct of that kind.
Subsection (1) only applies if the party against whom evidence of the admission is adduced has raised in the proceeding an issue about whether the admission or its making were so influenced.
This section applies only in a criminal proceeding and only to evidence of an admission made by a defendant—
(a) to, or in the presence of, an investigating official who at that time was performing functions in connection with the investigation of the commission, or possible commission, of an offence, or
(b) as a result of an act of another person who was, and who the defendant knew or reasonably believed to be, capable of influencing the decision whether a prosecution of the defendant should be brought or should be continued.
Subsection (1) was inserted as a response to the decision of the High Court of Australia in Kelly v The Queen(2004) 218 CLR 216.
Evidence of the admission is not admissible unless the circumstances in which the admission was made were such as to make it unlikely that the truth of the admission was adversely affected.
Without limiting the matters that the court may take into account for the purposes of subsection (2), it is to take into account—
(a) any relevant condition or characteristic of the person who made the admission, including age, personality and education and any mental, intellectual or physical disability to which the person is or appears to be subject, and
(b) if the admission was made in response to questioning—
(i) the nature of the questions and the manner in which they were put, and
(ii) the nature of any threat, promise or other inducement made to the person questioned.
This section applies only in a criminal proceeding and only if an oral admission was made by a defendant to an investigating official in response to a question put or a representation made by the official.
A document prepared by or on behalf of the official is not admissible to prove the contents of the question, representation or response unless the defendant has acknowledged that the document is a true record of the question, representation or response.
The acknowledgement must be made by signing, initialling or otherwise marking the document.
In this section—
(a) a sound recording, or a transcript of a sound recording, or
(b) a recording of visual images and sounds, or a transcript of the sounds so recorded.
For the purpose of determining whether a previous representation made by a person is also taken to be an admission by a party, the court is to admit the representation if it is reasonably open to find that—
(a) when the representation was made, the person had authority to make statements on behalf of the party in relation to the matter with respect to which the representation was made, or
(b) when the representation was made, the person was an employee of the party, or had authority otherwise to act for the party, and the representation related to a matter within the scope of the person’s employment or authority, or
(c) the representation was made by the person in furtherance of a common purpose (whether lawful or not) that the person had with the party or one or more persons including the party.
For the purposes of this section, the hearsay rule does not apply to a previous representation made by a person that tends to prove—
(a) that the person had authority to make statements on behalf of another person in relation to a matter, or
(b) that the person was an employee of another person or had authority otherwise to act for another person, or
(c) the scope of the person’s employment or authority.
For the purpose of determining whether evidence of an admission is admissible, the court is to find that a particular person made the admission if it is reasonably open to find that he or she made the admission.
Subject to section 89A, in a criminal proceeding, an inference unfavourable to a party must not be drawn from evidence that the party or another person failed or refused—
(a) a proceeding for the committal of a person for trial or sentence for an offence, and
(b) a proceeding relating to bail,
but does not include a prosecution for an offence that is a prescribed taxation offence within the meaning of Part III of the Taxation Administration Act 1953 of the Commonwealth.
(a) anything on which there is writing, or
(b) anything on which there are marks, figures, symbols or perforations having a meaning for persons qualified to interpret them, or
(c) anything from which sounds, images or writings can be reproduced with or without the aid of anything else, or
(d) a map, plan, drawing or photograph.
See also clause 8 of Part 2 of this Dictionary on the meaning of “document”.
The Commonwealth Act includes a definition of this term.
The Commonwealth definition of this term differs from this definition.
The Commonwealth Act does not include definitions of
(a) an assertion by a person to the effect that a defendant was, or resembles (visually, aurally or otherwise) a person who was, present at or near a place where—
(i) the offence for which the defendant is being prosecuted was committed, or
(ii) an act connected to that offence was done,
at or about the time at which the offence was committed or the act was done, being an assertion that is based wholly or partly on what the person making the assertion saw, heard or otherwise perceived at that place and time, or
(b) a report (whether oral or in writing) of such an assertion.
(a) a police officer (other than a police officer who is engaged in covert investigations under the orders of a superior), or
(b) a person appointed by or under an Australian law (other than a person who is engaged in covert investigations under the orders of a superior) whose functions include functions in respect of the prevention or investigation of offences.
(a) in relation to the Parliament of the Commonwealth—a joint sitting of the members of the Senate and of the House of Representatives convened by the Governor-General under section 57 of the Commonwealth Constitution or convened under any Act of the Commonwealth, or
(b) in relation to a bicameral legislature of a State—a joint sitting of both Houses of the legislature convened under a law of the State.
(a) directly or indirectly suggests a particular answer to the question, or
(b) assumes the existence of a fact the existence of which is in dispute in the proceeding and as to the existence of which the witness has not given evidence before the question is asked.
Examples of legal counsel are in-house counsel and government solicitors.
(a) the Supreme Court, or
(b) any other court created by Parliament,
and includes any person or body (other than a court) that, in exercising a function under the law of the State, is required to apply the laws of evidence.
The Commonwealth Act does not include this definition.
(a) a member of the Australian Federal Police, or
(b) a member of the police force of a State or Territory.
(a) forms part of the records of the Crown in any of its capacities, or
(b) forms part of the records of the government of a foreign country, or
(c) forms part of the records of a person or body holding office or exercising a function under or because of the Commonwealth Constitution, an Australian law or a law of a foreign country, or
(d) is being kept by or on behalf of the Crown, such a government or such a person or body,
and includes the records of the proceedings of, and papers presented to—
(e) an Australian Parliament, a House of an Australian Parliament, a committee of such a House or a committee of an Australian Parliament, and
(f) a legislature of a foreign country, including a House or committee (however described) of such a legislature.
(a) an express or implied representation (whether oral or in writing), or
(b) a representation to be inferred from conduct, or
(c) a representation not intended by its maker to be communicated to or seen by another person, or
(d) a representation that for any reason is not communicated.
A reference in this Act to a
(a) a profession, calling, occupation, trade or undertaking,
(b) an activity engaged in or carried on by the Crown in any of its capacities,
(c) an activity engaged in or carried on by the government of a foreign country,
(d) an activity engaged in or carried on by a person or body holding office or exercising power under or because of the Commonwealth Constitution, an Australian law or a law of a foreign country, being an activity engaged in or carried on in the performance of the functions of the office or in the exercise of the power (otherwise than in a private capacity),
(e) the proceedings of an Australian Parliament, a House of an Australian Parliament, a committee of such a House or a committee of an Australian Parliament,
(f) the proceedings of a legislature of a foreign country, including a House or committee (however described) of such a legislature.
A reference in this Act to a business also includes a reference to—
(a) a business that is not engaged in or carried on for profit, or
(b) a business engaged in or carried on outside Australia.
A reference in this Act to
A reference in this Act to
A reference in this Act to
If a party has recalled a witness who has already given evidence, a reference in this Act to re-examination of a witness does not include a reference to the questioning of the witness by that party before the witness is questioned by another party.
For the purposes of this Act, a person is taken to be liable to a civil penalty if, in an Australian or overseas proceeding (other than a criminal proceeding), the person would be liable to a penalty arising under an Australian law or a law of a foreign country.
For the purposes of this Act, a person is taken not to be available to give evidence about a fact if—
(a) the person is dead, or
(b) the person is, for any reason other than the application of section 16 (Competence and compellability: judges and jurors), not competent to give the evidence, or
(c) the person is mentally or physically unable to give the evidence and it is not reasonably practicable to overcome that inability, or
(d) it would be unlawful for the person to give the evidence, or
(e) a provision of this Act prohibits the evidence being given, or
(f) all reasonable steps have been taken, by the party seeking to prove the person is not available, to find the person or secure his or her attendance, but without success, or
(g) all reasonable steps have been taken, by the party seeking to prove the person is not available, to compel the person to give the evidence, but without success.
In all other cases the person is taken to be available to give evidence about the fact.
For the purposes of this Act, a document or thing is taken not to be available to a party if and only if—
(a) it cannot be found after reasonable inquiry and search by the party, or
(b) it was destroyed by the party, or by a person on behalf of the party, otherwise than in bad faith, or was destroyed by another person, or
(c) it would be impractical to produce the document or thing during the course of the proceeding, or
(d) production of the document or thing during the course of the proceeding could render a person liable to conviction for an offence, or
(e) it is not in the possession or under the control of the party and—
(i) it cannot be obtained by any judicial procedure of the court, or
(ii) it is in the possession or under the control of another party to the proceeding concerned who knows or might reasonably be expected to know that evidence of the contents of the document, or evidence of the thing, is likely to be relevant in the proceeding, or
(iii) it was in the possession or under the control of such a party at a time when that party knew or might reasonably be expected to have known that such evidence was likely to be relevant in the proceeding.
For the purposes of this Act, a representation contained in a document is taken to have been made by a person if—
(a) the document was written, made or otherwise produced by the person, or
(b) the representation was recognised by the person as his or her representation by signing, initialling or otherwise marking the document.
A reference in this Act to a witness includes a reference to a party giving evidence.
A reference in this Act to a witness who has been called by a party to give evidence includes a reference to the party giving evidence.
A reference in this clause to a party includes a defendant in a criminal proceeding.
A reference in this Act to a document includes a reference to—
(a) any part of the document, or
(b) any copy, reproduction or duplicate of the document or of any part of the document, or
(c) any part of such a copy, reproduction or duplicate.
In this Act—
(a) a reference to a person appointed or holding office under or because of an Australian law or a law of the Commonwealth includes a reference to an APS employee within the meaning of the Public Service Act 1999 of the Commonwealth, and
(b) in that context, a reference to an office is a reference to a position occupied by the APS employee concerned, and a reference to an officer includes a reference to a Secretary, or APS employee, within the meaning of the Act.
A reference in this Act to a law of the Commonwealth, a State, a Territory or a foreign country is a reference to a law (whether written or unwritten) of or in force in that place.
A reference in this Act to an Australian law is a reference to an Australian law (whether written or unwritten) of or in force in Australia.
A reference in this Act to a child of a person includes a reference to—
(a) an adopted child or ex-nuptial child of the person, or
(b) a child living with the person as if the child were a member of the person’s family.
A reference in this Act to a parent of a person includes a reference to—
(a) an adoptive parent of the person, or
(b) if the person is an ex-nuptial child—the person’s natural father, or
(c) the person with whom a child is living as if the child were a member of the person’s family.
A reference in this Act to a de facto partner of a person is a reference to a person who is in a de facto relationship with the person.
A person is in a de facto relationship with another person if the two persons have a relationship as a couple and are not legally married.
In determining whether two persons are in a de facto relationship, all the circumstances of the relationship are to be taken into account, including such of the following matters as are relevant in the circumstances of the particular case—
(a) the duration of the relationship,
(b) the nature and extent of their common residence,
(c) the degree of financial dependence or interdependence, and any arrangements for financial support, between them,
(d) the ownership, use and acquisition of their property,
(e) the degree of mutual commitment to a shared life,
(f) the care and support of children,
(g) the reputation and public aspects of the relationship.
No particular finding in relation to any circumstance is to be regarded as necessary in deciding whether two persons have a relationship as a couple.
For the purposes of subclause (3), the following matters are irrelevant—
(a) whether the persons are different sexes or the same sex,
(b) whether either of the persons is legally married to someone else or in another de facto relationship.
Evidence Act 1995 No 25. Assented to 19.6.1995. Date of commencement of Part 1.1 and Dictionary, assent, sec 2 (1); date of commencement of the remainder, 1.9.1995, sec 2 (2) and GG No 102 of 25.8.1995, p 4354. This Act has been amended as follows—
No 99 | Statute Law (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act (No 2) 1995. Assented to 21.12.1995. Date of commencement of Sch 2.6, assent, sec 2 (2). | |
No 55 | Statute Law (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act 1997. Assented to 2.7.1997. Date of commencement of Sch 1.7, 1.8.1997, Sch 1.7 and GG No 86 of 1.8.1997, p 5834. | |
No 122 | Evidence Amendment (Confidential Communications) Act 1997. Assented to 10.12.1997. Date of commencement, 1.1.1998, sec 2 and GG No 149 of 19.12.1997, p 10091. | |
No 147 | Statute Law (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act (No 2) 1997. Assented to 17.12.1997. Sch 1.7 was not commenced and was repealed by Sch 3.23 to the Statute Law (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act 2000 No 53 with effect from 29.6.2000. | |
No 54 | Statute Law (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act 1998. Assented to 30.6.1998. Date of commencement of Sch 2.15, assent, sec 2 (2). | |
No 107 | Criminal Procedure Legislation Amendment (Bail Agreements) Act 1998. Assented to 9.11.1998. Date of commencement of Sch 3.4, 1.10.2000, sec 2 and GG No 127 of 29.9.2000, p 10810. | |
No 158 | Children and Young Persons Legislation (Repeal and Amendment) Act 1998. Assented to 14.12.1998. Date of commencement of Sch 2.14, 9.12.2011, sec 2 and 2011 (625) LW 9.12.2011. | |
No 48 | Criminal Procedure Amendment (Sexual Assault Communications Privilege) Act 1999. Assented to 1.11.1999. Date of commencement, 5.11.1999, sec 2 and GG No 126 of 5.11.1999, p 10403. | |
No 94 | Crimes Legislation Amendment (Sentencing) Act 1999. Assented to 8.12.1999. Date of commencement of Sch 4.21 [1], 25.2.2000, sec 2 (1) and GG No 29 of 25.2.2000, p 1321; Sch 4.21 [2] and [3] were without effect as the sections being amended were substituted or repealed by the Criminal Procedure Amendment (Sexual Assault Communications Privilege) Act 1999 No 48 with effect from 5.11.1999; date of commencement of Sch 4.70, 1.1.2000, sec 2 (1) and GG No 144 of 24.12.1999, p 12184. | |
No 53 | Statute Law (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act 2000. Assented to 29.6.2000. Date of commencement of Sch 1.5, assent, sec 2 (2). | |
No 34 | Corporations (Consequential Amendments) Act 2001. Assented to 28.6.2001. Date of commencement of Sch 4.17, 15.7.2001, sec 2 (1) and Commonwealth Gazette No S 285 of 13.7.2001. | |
No 109 | Evidence Legislation Amendment Act 2001. Assented to 14.12.2001. Date of commencement, 26.7.2002, sec 2 and GG No 122 of 26.7.2002, p 5541. | |
No 121 | Justices Legislation Repeal and Amendment Act 2001. Assented to 19.12.2001. Date of commencement of Sch 2, 7.7.2003, sec 2 and GG No 104 of 27.6.2003, p 5978. | |
No 73 | Miscellaneous Acts Amendment (Relationships) Act 2002. Assented to 1.10.2002. |
Date of commencement, 1.11.2002, sec 2 and GG No 201 of 1.11.2002, p 9302. | ||
No 25 | Criminal Procedure Further Amendment (Evidence) Act 2005. Assented to 31.5.2005. Date of commencement of Sch 2.3, 12.8.2005, sec 2 and GG No 102 of 12.8.2005, p 4309. | |
No 46 | Evidence Amendment Act 2007. Assented to 1.11.2007. Date of commencement, 1.1.2009, sec 2 and GG No 158 of 19.12.2008, p 12305. Amended by Courts and Crimes Legislation Further Amendment Act 2008 No 107. Assented to 8.12.2008. Date of commencement of Sch 12, assent, sec 2 (1). | |
No 94 | Miscellaneous Acts (Local Court) Amendment Act 2007. Assented to 13.12.2007. Date of commencement of Sch 2, 6.7.2009, sec 2 and 2009 (314) LW 3.7.2009. | |
No 107 | Courts and Crimes Legislation Further Amendment Act 2008. Assented to 8.12.2008. The amendment made by Sch 11 was without effect as the provision being amended was amended by the Evidence Amendment Act 2007 No 46. | |
No 69 | Evidence Amendment Act 2010. Assented to 28.9.2010. Date of commencement, 14.1.2011, sec 2 and 2011 (2) LW 14.1.2011. | |
No 18 | Evidence Amendment (Journalist Privilege) Act 2011. Assented to 21.6.2011. Date of commencement, assent, sec 2. | |
No 9 | Evidence Amendment (Evidence of Silence) Act 2013. Assented to 25.3.2013. Date of commencement, 1.9.2013, sec 2 and 2013 (446) LW 23.8.2013. | |
No 80 | Crimes and Courts Legislation Amendment Act 2013. Assented to 29.10.2013. Date of commencement, assent, sec 2. | |
No 5 | Bail (Consequential Amendments) Act 2014. Assented to 12.3.2014. Date of commencement, 20.5.2014, sec 2 and 2014 (235) LW 24.4.2014. | |
No 7 | Legal Profession Uniform Law Application Legislation Amendment Act 2015. Assented to 9.6.2015. Date of commencement of Sch 2, 1.7.2015, sec 2 (2) and 2015 (299) LW 19.6.2015. | |
No 4 | Justice Legislation Amendment Act 2018. Assented to 21.3.2018. Date of commencement of Sch 1.8, 2.7.2018, sec 2 (2) and 2018 (133) LW 13.4.2018. | |
No 28 | Miscellaneous Acts Amendment (Marriages) Act 2018. Assented to 15.6.2018. Date of commencement, assent, sec 2. | |
No 29 | Justice Legislation Amendment Act (No 2) 2018. Assented to 21.6.2018. Date of commencement of Sch 2, assent, sec 2 (1). | |
No 25 | Children’s Guardian Act 2019. Assented to 4.12.2019. Date of commencement of Sch 5.19, 1.3.2020, sec 2(1). | |
No 8 | Evidence Amendment (Tendency and Coincidence) Act 2020. Assented to 10.6.2020. Date of commencement, 1.7.2020, sec 2. | |
No 70 | Crimes Amendment (Protection of Criminal Defence Lawyers) Act 2022. Assented to 25.11.2022. Date of commencement, assent, sec 2. |
Sec 4 | Am 2007 No 46, Sch 1 [1] [2]; 2014 No 5, Sch 2.18 [1]. |
Sec 8 | Am 2001 No 34, Sch 4.17 [1]. |
Sec 13 | Subst 2007 No 46, Sch 1 [3]. |
Sec 14 | Am 2007 No 46, Sch 1 [4]. |
Sec 18 | Am 2007 No 46, Sch 1 [5]. |
Sec 19 | Am 1998 No 158, Sch 2.14; 1999 No 94, Sch 4.21 [1]; 2001 No 121, Sch 2.103 [1]. Subst 2013 No 80, Sch 8. Am 2018 No 29, Sch 2.8; 2019 No 25, Sch 5.19[1] [2]. |
Sec 20 | Am 2007 No 46, Sch 1 [6] [7]. |
Sec 21 | Am 2007 No 46, Sch 1 [8]. |
Sec 22 | Am 2001 No 109, Sch 1 [1] [2]. |
Sec 23 | Am 2001 No 109, Sch 1 [3] [4]. |
Sec 24A | Ins 2001 No 109, Sch 1 [5]. |
Sec 29 | Am 2007 No 46, Sch 1 [9]. |
Sec 33 | Am 2007 No 46, Sch 1 [10]. |
Sec 37 | Am 2007 No 46, Sch 1 [11]. |
Sec 41 | Am 2005 No 25, Sch 2.3. Subst 2007 No 46, Sch 1 [12]. |
Sec 48 | Am 2000 No 53, Sch 1.5 [1] [2]. |
Sec 49 | Am 2000 No 53, Sch 1.5 [3]. |
Sec 50 | Am 2000 No 53, Sch 1.5 [4]; 2007 No 46, Sch 1 [13]. |
Sec 51 | Am 2000 No 53, Sch 1.5 [5]. |
Chapter 3, introductory note | Am 2007 No 46, Sch 1 [14]. |
Chapter 3, introductory note, diagram | Am 2007 No 46, Sch 1 [15]. |
Sec 59 | Am 2000 No 53, Sch 1.5 [6]; 2007 No 46, Sch 1 [16]–[18]. |
Sec 60 | Am 2007 No 46, Sch 1 [19] [20]. |
Sec 61 | Am 2007 No 46, Sch 1 [21] [22]. |
Sec 62 | Am 2007 No 46, Sch 1 [23]. |
Sec 63 | Am 2000 No 53, Sch 1.5 [7]. |
Sec 64 | Am 2000 No 53, Sch 1.5 [8]; 2007 No 46, Sch 1 [24]. |
Sec 65 | Am 2000 No 53, Sch 1.5 [9]; 2007 No 46, Sch 1 [25]–[27]. |
Sec 66 | Am 2007 No 46, Sch 1 [28]. |
Sec 66A | Ins 2007 No 46, Sch 1 [29]. |
Sec 71 | Subst 2007 No 46, Sch 1 [30]. |
Sec 72 | Subst 2007 No 46, Sch 1 [31]. |
Sec 73 | Am 2018 No 28, Sch 4 [1]. |
Sec 76 | Am 2000 No 53, Sch 1.5 [10]; 2007 No 46, Sch 1 [32]. |
Sec 78A | Ins 2007 No 46, Sch 1 [33]. |
Sec 79 | Am 2007 No 46, Sch 1 [34]. |
Sec 82 | Am 2000 No 53, Sch 1.5 [11]; 2007 No 46, Sch 1 [35]. |
Sec 85 | Am 2007 No 46, Sch 1 [36]. |
Sec 89 | Am 2007 No 46, Sch 1 [37]; 2013 No 9, Sch 1 [1]. |
Sec 89A | Ins 2013 No 9, Sch 1 [2]. |
Sec 94 | Am 2020 No 8, Sch 1[1]. |
Sec 97 | Am 2007 No 46, Sch 1 [38]. |
Sec 97A | Ins 2020 No 8, Sch 1[2]. |
Sec 98 | Subst 2007 No 46, Sch 1 [39]. Am 2020 No 8, Sch 1[3]. |
Sec 101 | Am 2020 No 8, Sch 1[4]. |
Part 3.7, Div 1 (sec 101A) | Ins 2007 No 46, Sch 1 [40]. |
Part 3.7, Div 2, heading | Ins 2007 No 46, Sch 1 [40]. |
Sec 102 | Am 1997 No 55, Sch 1.7 [1]–[3]. Subst 2007 No 46, Sch 1 [40]. |
Sec 103 | Am 2007 No 46, Sch 1 [41] [42]. |
Sec 104 | Am 2007 No 46, Sch 1 [43]–[46]. |
Sec 106 | Subst 2007 No 46, Sch 1 [47]. |
Sec 107 | Rep 1997 No 55, Sch 1.7 [4]. |
Sec 108 | Am 1997 No 55, Sch 1.7 [5] [6]. |
Part 3.7, Div 3, heading | Ins 2007 No 46, Sch 1 [48]. |
Sec 108A | Ins 1997 No 55, Sch 1.7 [7]. Am 2007 No 46, Sch 1 [49] [50]. |
Sec 108B | Ins 2007 No 46, Sch 1 [51]. |
Part 3.7, Div 4 (sec 108C) | Ins 2007 No 46, Sch 1 [51]. |
Sec 112 | Am 2007 No 46, Sch 1 [52]. |
Sec 114 | Am 2007 No 46, Sch 1 [53]. |
Sec 117 | Am 2007 No 46, Sch 1 [54] [55]; 2015 No 7, Sch 2.17 [1]. |
Sec 118 | Am 2007 No 46, Sch 1 [56]. |
Sec 120 | Am 1997 No 55, Sch 1.7 [8]. |
Sec 122 | Subst 2007 No 46, Sch 1 [57]. |
Part 3.10, Div 1A | Ins 1997 No 122, Sch 1. |
Part 3.10, Div 1A, note | Ins 1998 No 54, Sch 2.15 [1]. Rep 2007 No 46, Sch 1 [58]. |
Sec 126A | Ins 1997 No 122, Sch 1. Am 2007 No 46, Sch 1 [59]; 2011 No 18, Sch 1 [1]. |
Sec 126B | Ins 1997 No 122, Sch 1. Am 2011 No 18, Sch 1 [2]. |
Secs 126C–126E | Ins 1997 No 122, Sch 1. |
Sec 126F | Ins 1997 No 122, Sch 1. Am 1999 No 48, Sch 2.1 [1]; 2001 No 121, Sch 2.103 [2]; 2007 No 46, Sch 1 [60]. |
Part 3.10, Div 1B | Ins 1997 No 122, Sch 1. Subst 1999 No 48, Sch 2.1 [2]. |
Part 3.10, Div 1B, note | Ins 1998 No 54, Sch 2.15 [1]. Subst 1999 No 48, Sch 2.1 [2]. |
Sec 126G | Ins 1997 No 122, Sch 1. Subst 1999 No 48, Sch 2.1 [2]. Am 1999 No 94, Sch 4.70 [1]; 2001 No 121, Sch 2.103 [3]. |
Sec 126H | Ins 1997 No 122, Sch 1. Subst 1999 No 48, Sch 2.1 [2]. Am 1999 No 94, Sch 4.70 [2]; 2001 No 121, Sch 2.103 [4]. |
Sec 126I | Ins 1997 No 122, Sch 1. Subst 1999 No 48, Sch 2.1 [2]. |
Part 3.10, Div 1C | Ins 2011 No 18, Sch 1 [3]. |
Sec 126J | Ins 1997 No 122, Sch 1. Rep 1999 No 48, Sch 2.1 [2]. Ins 2011 No 18, Sch 1 [3]. |
Sec 126K | Ins 1997 No 122, Sch 1. Am 1998 No 54, Sch 2.15 [2]. Rep 1999 No 48, Sch 2.1 [2]. Ins 2011 No 18, Sch 1 [3]. |
Sec 126L | Ins 1997 No 122, Sch 1. Rep 1999 No 48, Sch 2.1 [2]. Ins 2011 No 18, Sch 1 [3]. |
Sec 128 | Am 1995 No 99, Sch 2.6; 1997 No 55, Sch 1.7 [9] [10]. Subst 2007 No 46, Sch 1 [61] (am 2008 No 107, Sch 12 [1]). Am 2010 No 69, Sch 1 [1]–[4]. |
Sec 128A | Ins 2007 No 46, Sch 1 [62] (am 2008 No 107, Sch 12 [2]). Am 2010 No 69, Sch 1 [5]. |
Sec 129 | Am 2022 No 70, Sch 2.2. |
Sec 131A | Ins 2007 No 46, Sch 1 [63]. Am 2011 No 18, Sch 1 [4]. |
Part 3.11, heading | Subst 2007 No 46, Sch 1 [64]. |
Sec 138, heading | Am 1998 No 54, Sch 2.15 [3]. |
Sec 139 | Am 2007 No 46, Sch 1 [65]. |
Sec 147 | Am 2000 No 53, Sch 1.5 [12]. |
Sec 148 | Am 2007 No 46, Sch 1 [66] [67]. |
Sec 149 | Am 2000 No 53, Sch 1.5 [13]. |
Sec 152 | Am 2000 No 53, Sch 1.5 [14]. |
Sec 154 | Am 1997 No 55, Sch 1.7 [11]. |
Sec 155 | Am 1997 No 55, Sch 1.7 [12]. |
Sec 155A | Ins 2000 No 53, Sch 1.5 [15]. |
Sec 158 | Am 1997 No 55, Sch 1.7 [13]. |
Sec 160 | Am 2000 No 53, Sch 1.5 [16]; 2018 No 4, Sch 1.8. |
Sec 161 | Subst 2007 No 46, Sch 1 [68]. |
Part 4.5, heading | Am 2007 No 46, Sch 1 [69]. |
Sec 165 | Am 2001 No 109, Sch 1 [6] [7]; 2007 No 46, Sch 1 [70] [71]. |
Secs 165A, 165B | Ins 2001 No 109, Sch 1 [8]. Subst 2007 No 46, Sch 1 [72]. |
Part 4.6, Div 1, note | Am 2000 No 53, Sch 1.5 [17]. |
Part 4.6, Div 2, note | Am 2000 No 53, Sch 1.5 [18]. |
Sec 183 | Am 2000 No 53, Sch 1.5 [19]. |
Sec 184 | Am 2007 No 46, Sch 1 [73] [74]. |
Sec 189 | Am 2007 No 46, Sch 1 [75]. |
Sec 190 | Am 2007 No 46, Sch 1 [10]. |
Sec 191 | Am 2007 No 46, Sch 1 [76]. |
Sec 192A | Ins 2007 No 46, Sch 1 [77]. |
Sec 194 | Am 1998 No 107, Sch 3.4; 2014 No 5, Sch 2.18 [2]. |
Sec 196 | Am 2001 No 121, Sch 2.103 [5]; 2007 No 94, Sch 2. |
Sec 198 | Ins 2007 No 46, Sch 1 [78]. |
Sch 2 | Ins 2007 No 46, Sch 1 [79]. Am 2007 No 46, Schs 1 [80], Sch 2.4 (cll 2–15 of Part 2 transferred from the Evidence (Consequential and Other Provisions) Act 1995 No 27); 2010 No 69, Sch 1 [6]; 2011 No 18, Sch 1 [5]; 2013 No 9, Sch 1 [3] [4]; 2018 No 28, Sch 4 [2]; 2020 No 8, Sch 1[5]. |
Dictionary | Am 1997 No 55, Sch 1.7 [14]–[16]; 2000 No 53, Sch 1.5 [20] [21]; 2001 No 34, Sch 4.17 [2]; 2002 No 73, Sch 1.10; 2007 No 46, Sch 1 [81]–[90]; 2010 No 69, Sch 1 [7]; 2015 No 7, Sch 2.17 [2]–[4]. |
0
4
0