Documentary Evidence Under the Evidence Act 1995 (NSW)

• NCJ Number: 195340
• Journal: Judicial Review Volume: 5 Issue: 1 Dated: 2001 Pages: 1-19
• Author(s): Virginia Bell
• Date Published: 2001
• Length: 19 pages
• Publication Format: Article
• Publication Type: Legislation/Policy Analysis
• Language: English
• Country: Australia
• Note: This article is an edited version of a paper that was presented to the Local Courts of New South Wales Annual Conference, May 31-June 2, 2000, Sydney.

Annotation

This article examines the changes to the Evidence Act of 1995 in New South Wales.

Abstract

Under the Act, the “document in question” is the contents of the “original document” including a copy document of the document in question. The Act sets out the various ways in which a party may bring forward evidence of the contents of a document. The status of transcripts of recorded conversations has been a source of difficulty when the transcript is indistinct. A transcript can be viewed as an aid to listening though it is not independent evidence of the recorded conversation. On proof of documents that are not available to the party, the party is permitted to bring forward evidence of the contents of a document by tendering a document that is a copy of, or an extract from or summary of, the document in question. A mechanism is provided for the proof of voluminous or complex documents by bringing forward the contents of two or more documents in question in the form of a summary. The Act establishes a system that allows a party against whom documents are to be tendered to address requests to the tendering party. The nature of the requests include a request to examine, test or copy the document, and a request that the tendering party call as a witness a specified person concerned in the production or maintenance of the document. In dealing with the admissibility of evidence, the exceptions to the hearsay rule concerning business records and the contents of tags and labels include if the person who had or might be supposed to have had personal knowledge of the asserted fact. The provisions governing refreshment of memory and cross examination on documents holds that whether a witness has been cross examined on his or her own document, the cross examiner may be required to produce the document to the court. The court may give directions as to the use of the document including admitting it into evidence. In the event that cross-examination upon a document has created a misleading impression as to the contents of the document, the Act provides a mechanism for redress. 52 footnotes