This note discusses the meaning of the law of evidence, its relevance, the general notions underlying the law of evidence, and its relationship with substantive law.
This note will discuss the meaning of facts, evidence, and proof as used in the law of evidence, and the relationship between these three terms. These terms are extremely important in understanding the law of evidence.
In a previous note, we defined facts as things or states of things that can be perceived by the senses. In this note, we will discuss the classification of facts: facts in issue and relevant facts.
In a previous note, we discussed the meaning of evidence as information that is used to prove or disprove facts. In this note, we will discuss how evidence is traditionally classified under the law of evidence. The traditional classifications to be discussed are: real evidence, testimonial or oral evidence, demonstrative evidence, and documentary evidence. The note will then highlight some other classifications of evidence, such as circumstantial evidence and parole evidence, among others.
This note discusses the statutory definition of proof and its key elements. The note will also highlight some case law and scholarly definitions of proof.
This note will discuss the meaning of burden of proof, its significance, and its categories.
This note will discuss civil actions and the burden of proof on parties in a civil action. On the latter, the note will discuss the burden of producing evidence, the burden of persuasion and circumstances under which these burdens will shift from one party to the other.
This note will discuss the burden of proof on parties in a criminal action. Specifically, the following will be discussed: 1. The general nature of a criminal action; 2. The cardinal rule that the burden of proof is on the prosecution unless shifted after the establishment of a prima facie case; 3. The standard of proof on the prosecution as being beyond reasonable doubt; 4. Circumstances under which the burden of proof will shift to the accused; 5. The standard of proof on the accused when he bears the burden of proof; and 6. Three exceptions to the general rule that the burden of proof is on the prosecution.
This note will briefly highlight the exceptions to the requirement that facts must be proved by evidence. The exceptions to be highlighted are judicial notice, presumptions, and admissions.
This note will discuss the meaning of judicial notice, its rationale, the base condition for taking judicial notice, the circumstances under which a court may take judicial notice, when judicial notice may be taken, and some instances where it was validly taken.
This note will discuss the meaning of presumptions, the two types of presumptions, and the rationale and effects of presumptions.
This note will highlight the five differences between presumptions and inferences.
One of the types of presumptions is rebuttable presumptions. This note will discuss the meaning of rebuttable presumptions, their effects, how a rebuttable presumption may be created, examples of rebuttable presumptions contained in the Evidence Act, 1975 (NRCD 323), and the procedure in applying rebuttable presumptions.
This note will discuss the meaning of relevant and admissible evidence, the test for the relevance of evidence, and distinguish between two types of inadmissible evidence-evidence inadmissible per se and evidence inadmissible upon an objection.
This note will discuss the rules on the admissibility of evidence. The rules to be discussed include the general rule that all relevant evidence is admissible, the rule that judges have an exclusionary discretionary to exclude relevant evidence, the rule that the court has a duty to exclude evidence inadmissible per se, but not such a duty for evidence that is inadmissible upon objection, among others.
This note will define illegally obtained evidence, the schools of thought on the admissibility of illegally obtained evidence, the present Ghanaian position on the admissibility of illegally obtained evidence, and the admissibility of illegally obtained evidence in light of the Evidence Act, 1975 (NRCD 323).
This note will highlight the circumstances where there would be a trial by judge and jury and the role of the judge and that of the jury in such trials.
This note will discuss the meaning of summing up, the meaning of misdirection, the various types of misdirection, when a misdirection would have an effect of causing a variation of a judgement, the absence of a definite format in summing up, and what a judge must do, can do, and cannot do in summing up to avoid misdirection.
This note will discuss the meaning of traditional evidence, why it is characterised as hearsay evidence, its admissibility despite being hearsay evidence, how conflicting traditional evidence should be evaluated, and what happens if a party is unable to prove his traditional history by traditional evidence.