 |  |
|
 |
 |
 |
 |
|  | |  | |
Section 19: Witness statements and evidence
Proposal 35
A rule should be adopted giving the court express powers to exercise control over the
evidence to be adduced by the parties by giving directions as to the issues on which it
requires evidence; the nature of the evidence which it requires to decide those issues; and
the way in which the evidence is to be placed before the Court.
Such power extends to
powers to exclude evidence that would otherwise be admissible and to the limiting of cross-
examination.
Proposal 36
For the avoidance of doubt, the High Court Ordinance should be amended to provide an
express rule-making power permitting the court to restrict the use of relevant evidence in
furtherance of the overriding objective.
Proposals
give directions defining the issues on which it requires evidence; what evidence it requires;
and how the evidence is to be placed before the court) should not be adopted.
A practice direction should be issued giving notice of the court's intention to curb excessive
and prolix examination and cross-examination by more stringently excluding irrelevant
evidence and, where relevance of the evidence has been rendered marginal by repetition and
prolixity in examination or cross-examination, treating the evidence produced by further
reiteration as inadmissible on the ground that it is insufficiently relevant to qualify as
admissible.
Proposal 37
A rule should be adopted to promote flexibility in the court's treatment of witness statements,
by expressly catering for reasonable applications for witnesses to be allowed to amplify or to
add to their statements.
Proposal
(for introducing greater flexibility in permitting a witness to amplify or
supplement his witness statement) should be adopted, replacing O 38 r 2A(7)(b) by a rule
along the lines of CPR 32.5(3) and (4).
|
 |
|