Publication Type

Transcript

Publication Date

2-2018

Abstract

This piece addressestwo recent local decisions on similar fact evidence that demonstratethe court’s difficulties with reconciling the provisions of the Evidence Actwith a more flexible approach that can be developed through the common law.These two cases extend the basis for admitting similar fact evidence beyond ss11(b), 14 and 15 of the Evidence Act.The application of the common law balancing test comparing prejudicial effectand probative value has also been broadened to consider factors such as the timingof the objection to the evidence and whether a co-accused wishes to rely on thesimilar fact evidence. Yet, the cases do not discuss the conceptual andnormative justification for so doing, taking us further down the path of pragmatismover principle.

Keywords

Similar Fact Evidence

Discipline

Dispute Resolution and Arbitration | Evidence

Research Areas

Dispute Resolution

Publication

Singapore Academy of Law Journal

First Page

1

Last Page

17

ISSN

0218-2009

Publisher

Singapore Academy of Law

Creative Commons License

Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial-No Derivative Works 4.0 License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial-No Derivative Works 4.0 License.

Share

COinS