Evidence Law

All facts are provided in attached PDF

Question 1
Having regard to Kayli’s cross-examination in paragraphs 14 to 16, discuss with Muenda whether he has any grounds to object to Kayli’s evidence as set out in paragraph 18 based on any rule(s) of evidence, whether at common law or under the provisions of the Evidence Act 2008 (Vic) or both. Further, discuss with Muenda the likely ruling that the magistrate may make if Muenda were to raise an objection.
You must precisely identify any relevant rule(s) of evidence and/or provisions of the Evidence Act 2008 (Vic) and clearly demonstrate how they work to support your arguments. Note that the question does not require you to discuss whether Kayli is telling the truth, whether her evidence is credible, the merits of Muenda’s claim or the merits of Kayli’s defence.

Question 2 (6 marks)
Imagine you are Tugce. Regardless of your answer for Question 1, and having regard to all the Facts above, discuss with Muenda whether he may, based on a common law rule of evidence, make a submission that Kayli’s evidence lacks credibility, and why the evidence he has adduced should be preferred over hers.
You must precisely identify the relevant rule of evidence and your answer must clearly demonstrate how the rule works with regard to the relevant Facts. Note that the question does not require you to discuss which party is telling the truth or the sufficiency of the evidence to establish the tort of battery.

Last Completed Projects