INTERNATIONAL HIGHER DIPLOMA IN LAW

Assignment

STUDENT NAME : W.J.Wandana Fernando

EDHAT REGISTRATION
NO
: 1212223993

PROGRAMME : International Higher Diploma in Law

SUBJECT CODE & TITLE : Law of Evidence

ASSIGNMENT TITLE :

Summary of the Learning Outcomes Covered:

1. Explain and connect facts in issue with relevant facts to determine necessary evidence & differentiate
admissions and confessions.
2. Analyse the classification of evidences and apply them in different circumstances.
3. Demonstrate the procedures in the examination of witnesses and impeaching the credibility of the
witnesses.
4. Explain the rules on proof and the logic applied to identify the parties on whom the burden of proof is
to be imposed.

ASSIGNMENT TYPE : Individual

DATE :
DUE DATE :
DATE SUBMITTED :
ASSESSOR :
INTERNAL VERIFIER :

International Higher Diploma In Law Page 1 of 20

All Rights reserved
IDM Nations Campus Examination Division
PLAGIARISM:
While research and discussion are an essential part of an assignment, the deliberate copying of
someone else’s work or unacknowledged copying from printed or electronic sources is NOT permitted.
You may be subject to disciplinary procedure if you do this. You should sign this sheet to show that you
comply with these regulations.

Student’s Signature: Date: _____/_____/ ___________

T01 T02 T03 T04

TOTAL SCORE (Average of the above)

Assessor Comments:

Assessor: Signature: Date:_____/_____/ __________

Internal Verifier’s Comments:

Internal Verifier: Signature: Date:_____/_____/ __________

International Higher Diploma In Law Page 2 of 20

All Rights reserved
IDM Nations Campus Examination Division
Task 01
Discuss the competency of an accused

Total 100

Task 02

Analyze the difference between sworn evidence and dock statement along with the pros & cons

Total 100

Task 03

Admissibility of hearsay evidence. Discuss

Total 100

Task 04
The exceptions to burden of proof. Discuss

Total 100

END OF ASSIGNMENT

International Higher Diploma In Law Page 3 of 20

All Rights reserved
IDM Nations Campus Examination Division
Learning and assessment

The purpose of assessment is to ensure that effective learning of the content of each unit has taken place.
Evidence of this learning, or the application of the learning etc, is required for each unit. The assessment of the
evidence relates directly to the assessment criteria for each unit, supported by the grade descriptors.

The process of assessment can aid effective learning by seeking and interpreting evidence to decide the stage
that learners have reached in their learning, what further learning needs to take place and how best to do this. The
assessor and learner must be actively engaged in promoting a common understanding of the assessment criteria
and the grade descriptors of what it is they are trying to achieve and how well they achieve it, for further learning to
take place.

 Assessment Grading System

Assessment instruments collectively ensure coverage of all assessment criteria within each unit and
provide opportunities for the evidencing of all the grade descriptors. An assessment for the unit may
include assignments &/ or written examination. To complete the Higher Diploma qualification the students
are required to complete the Final Project.

 Assessment Method

Assessment is done using the Grade Point Average (GPA) method. The description of assessment
method is as follows,

1. Course Unit Assessment

Mark Range Grade Point Letter Grade

0 - 29 0.0 E
30 - 39 1.0 D
40 - 49 1.7 C-
50 - 54 2.0 C
55 - 59 2.3 B-
60 - 64 2.7 B
65 - 69 3.0 B+
70 - 74 3.3 A-
75 - 79 3.7 A
80 and above 4.0 A+

The student should maintain average 2.0 GPA to pass the semester examination. A student who
obtains ‘E’ or ‘D’ pass should upgrade the particular course unit at the very first opportunity.
However the upgrading is limited to a ‘C’ grade whatever the marks the student obtained at the
repeating attempt.

2. Semester Assessment
The Grade Point Average (GPA) is calculated according to the following formula.
GPA  (a  GP1  b  GP2  c  GP3  d  GP4 ) (a  b  c  d ) ,
where a, b, c, and d – denote the number of credits of the particular course unit and GP denotes Grade
Point obtained for the particular Course Unit

Example: GPA = (2*2.0 + 3*3.0 + 3*1.7 + 2*2.7) / (2+3+3+2)

= 2.35

International Higher Diploma In Law Page 4 of 20

All Rights reserved
IDM Nations Campus Examination Division
 3. Final Assessment

The final GPA (FGPA) for the International Higher Diploma is calculated as follows,

FGPA for the International Higher Diploma

Semester Percentage
Semester 1 20%
Semester 2 20%
Semester 3 30%
Semester 4 30%

4. Final Grade Descriptions

Final Grade Description

PASS 2.0 – 2.9 FGPA
MERIT 3.0 – 3.6 FGPA
DISTICNTION 3.7 and above FGPA

 Assessment Process

Final Mark Calculation for the Unit will be based on the following:

1. End Semester Examination* + Assignments

Method of Assessment Weight taken for the final Mark

Assignment 50%
End Semester 50%
Examination

*End Semester Examination is a written examination .

International Higher Diploma In Law Page 5 of 20

All Rights reserved
IDM Nations Campus Examination Division
Outcomes/Criteria Possible Page
Feedback
for the C / B-/ B Grading (Pass) evidence No.
P1:
Facts in issue and Relevant facts; Admissions and confessions

P1.1
Relevancy of evidence

P1.2
Admissions and confessions

P2:
Classification of evidence

P2. 1
Classification of evidence

P3:
Examination of Witnesses and impeaching the credibility of the witnesses

P3.1
Witnesses

P3.2
Impeaching the credibility of the witnesses

P4:
Proof

P4. 1
Burden of Proof

Outcomes/Criteria
Possible evidence Page No Feedback
for the B+ /A- Grading (Merit)

International Higher Diploma In Law Page 6 of 20

All Rights reserved
IDM Nations Campus Examination Division
Use of different theories,
strategies to apply the suitable
solution/s
Selecting the suitable
solution
Selecting example issues
in a system & applying
the most suitable
solution to manage the
quality

Use of various sources & or Selection of different

resources information sources
Using a proper
referencing system to
evidence the variety of
information sources &
resources

Presenting the completed work & Structuring the

or concluded findings collected , completed
findings
Proper flow of
information with an
organised set of topics
& sub topic list.

Streamlining the
presented outcome
Well organised
documentation with no
duplication of
information
The use of critical self evaluation Effective use of
& justification justifying the own work
The use of statements
that evidence the own
conclusions

International Higher Diploma In Law Page 7 of 20

All Rights reserved
IDM Nations Campus Examination Division
Outcomes/Criteria
Possible evidence Page No Feedback
for the A/A+ Grading (Distinction)
The use of clear definitions & Selection of clear &
explanations complete definition
High percentage of clear
explanations to make
the reading easier

Proper organising & managing the Activity & Time

assessment work Management
A Gant chart that consist
of all the records about
how activities have been
managed
Topic relevancy High demonstration of
maintaining timely
topics
All the topics & sub
topics must have a close
relationship to the given
task set.
proper concentration on creative, Appliance of creative &
innovative thinking innovative ideas
Clear evidence to
highlight the creative
thoughts & making the
documentation
interesting to the reader

International Higher Diploma In Law Page 8 of 20

All Rights reserved
IDM Nations Campus Examination Division
 Deliverable: Hard & Soft copy of word processed report
NOTE:
 You should include the COVER PAGE of this assignment including the Declaration of Academic
Honesty when you submit your final report.
 More work is required to achieve a pass. If you submit your assignment after the deadline set above
your assignment will be only marked for PASS provided it falls within the extended deadline.
 If submitted after the extended deadline, the assignment will not be accepted whereas you shall be
asked to go for a NEW assignment.
 Plagiarism is strictly prohibited and will lead for a “Fail” Grade.

Instructions to students:
1. All assignments should comprise of the standard Front Cover given. No other front page will be
accepted.
2. All assignments should be bound with BLACK hard board cover as the last sheet.
3. Clearly label the CD’S with your Name, Batch no and Student no and attach it to the Back cover of
your assignment.
4. Report Writing Guidelines:
I. Every Assignment should have an Introduction and Conclusion.
II. The Standard Table of Contents should be generated.
III. All the Figures, Table Diagrams, etc should be numbered.
IV. Main Heading Font: Arial – size 16
V. Sub Heading Font: Arial – size 14
VI. Body text Font : Arial- size 11
VII. Paragraph: Single line
VIII. Margins: Top – 1” Bottom – 1” Left – 1” Right – 1”
IX. Header – include the Module name on the Right hand side
X. Footer – include the Page number on the Right hand side
XI. All sections should have continuity and pages should be clearly labeled.
XII. References – clear references for all the materials, books, articles, website, etc should be given in
the following format:
 Books – title, Author, ISBN No, Publisher & Edition, Chapter & Page Nos.
 URL- Complete address e.g. http://www.abs.com/index/1234/xyz.asp.... and date
 Article, Journals: Name of Published material, date, author

International Higher Diploma In Law Page 9 of 20

All Rights reserved
IDM Nations Campus Examination Division
Declaration of Academic Honesty
Instructions

1. You must submit a completed copy of this form every time you submit an assignment.
2. You must submit this declaration electronically, either within your assignment, file, or as a separate
file.
3. If you do not submit this declaration, your work will not be assessed.
4. If any student is found to have been dishonest, then the student may face disciplinary action as
stated in the IDM Nations Campus Plagiarism Policy.

Student’s Full Name: W.J.Wandana Fernando

Date:
Assignment Title: Evidence Law
Declaration. (Insert YES or NO here): YES

1. I confirm that this assignment is my own work:

2. I confirm that where ever I have used someone else’s words, concepts, graphics or data in my
work, I have clearly indicated exactly where I have done so, using the Oscola referencing system.
(insert yes or no here):
3. I confirm that I have indicated by referencing, where I have used someone else’s words, concepts,
graphics or data, irrespective of whether I have quoted verbatim or I have paraphrased in my own
words.
4. I have clearly indicated in my assignment any work that has been contributed by another student.
5. I have clearly indicated in my assignment any work that has been carried out collaboratively with
another student.

……………………Wandana………………………..
Student Signature

International Higher Diploma In Law Page 10 of 20

All Rights reserved
IDM Nations Campus Examination Division
Task 1
Discuss the competency of an accused
Everyone is presumed competent to give evidence under the Evidence Act of 1995, and any competent
witness can be compelled to testify. However, if a party can prove that the person lacks capacity, the
presumption of competence can be rebutted. This rule is also subject to exceptions laid out in the act.
A person is competent to provide evidence about a fact if they cannot comprehend or respond to
questions about the fact, and this ineligibility cannot be overcome. This could be due to a mental or
physical disability, or it could be due to a variety of other factors.
Competence should not be mistaken for trust. A witness is not competent merely because they have poor
observational skills or poor memory. The competence of a person to act as a witness is referred to as their
ability.
The Evidence Act provides for several cases in which a person is not compelled to testify as a witness.

Capacity reduction:
Section 14 provides that a person is not compelled to testify as a witness if the court believes that there
would be a significant cost or delay in ensuring that the person understands and can answer questions,
and there has been appropriate evidence given on the topic by other people.

Defendants
A defendant is not compelled to testify against a co-defendant.
family members:
A defendant's spouse, de facto partner, parent, or child may object to the defendant being forced to testify
for the prosecution. The person who raises such an objection should not be forced to testify if the court
determines that
   
 There's a chance it'll hurt the individual or their relationship with the defendant and
 That risk outweighs the benefit of hearing the evidence.
The court must evaluate the crime for which the defendant is being tried, the nature of the testimony the
individual is likely to offer, and whether any additional evidence on the subject is available while making
this decision. It must also evaluate the person's relationship with the defendant and whether giving
evidence would require them to reveal classified data.

Officials from the state

The following people are not compelled to testify under Section 15:
 The sovereign.
 The governor-general
 A Territory Administrator is a person who is in charge of a territory.
 head of state of a foreign country.
Members of parliament cannot be compelled to testify if doing so would prohibit them from attending a
sitting of parliament or a committee meeting.

Compelling a person to give evidence

When a party needs someone to testify, they issue a subpoena requiring them to appear in court on a
specific date. A person who has been served with a subpoena is required to appear in court on the
designated day, and if they do not, the court may issue an arrest warrant. If someone obtains a subpoena
to testify and believes they are not a compellable witness, they must appear in court and inform the
judge.

International Higher Diploma In Law Page 11 of 20

All Rights reserved
IDM Nations Campus Examination Division
A compellable witness is required to answer all legitimate questions posed to them. Contempt of court
charges might be brought against you if you refuse to answer a legal question.

No one can be convicted of a crime if they are not competent to stand trial. To provide due process—that
is, to ensure that the processes are fair—courts need defendants to be competent before they stand trial.
Defendants have an indisputable right to know what is going on in their case and to participate in their
defense. They are legally incompetent if they are incapable of understanding and assisting.
No matter how strong the evidence of their crime, mentally incompetent people cannot be convicted. If a
defendant has shot someone in broad daylight and subsequently confessed to the crime, criminal
proceedings must be postponed until the defendant is competent. The defendant will be arrested and held
in custody, and the prosecution will file criminal charges, but the case will not move further until the
defendant's competency is "restored."
The defendant can't "waive" the issue of fitness to stand trial—the law requires competency before a case
can proceed.

              Incompetency Not a Defense: The defendant's ability to stand trial has nothing to do with his or
her mental state at the time of the alleged offense. In other words, competency refers to the defendant's
mental condition throughout the criminal procedure, not during the crime itself. Assume that the
defendant was suffering from a severe mental disorder when he shot the victim in the case above. If his
condition makes it impossible for him to comprehend future criminal procedures, he is incompetent and
the proceedings must be stopped. He'll be competent once he's had enough treatment to grasp what's
going on, at which point the case can move forward.
It will be decided at trial whether he has a mental state defense to the crime, such as insanity or limited
capacity.
A court can declare a defendant who has been diagnosed with a mental illness fit to stand trial as long as
the condition does not progress to the point of incompetence. If a defendant is taking prescription
medications to treat mental illness, for example, the court may determine competency and proceed with
the case. In addition, if a psychological evaluation finds that medication could help a defendant's mental
state, the court can order that the defendant receive the prescription.

The judgment of the court

The judge is the one who decides whether or not a defendant is competent. Before a trial, the judge must
decide on competency as quickly as feasible after it is called into doubt. At any moment, the prosecution,
defense counsel, or even the court, can raise the matter. Competency is frequently called into question
when the defendant's actions reveal a lack of comprehension. In some places, defense attorneys must ask
the court to have the defendant evaluated if they believe there is any doubt regarding his or her
competency.

How Do Courts Decide Whether Someone Is Competent?

When a real doubt about a defendant's competency develops, the defendant is entitled to a hearing to
assess his or her fitness to stand trial. All trial courts have the jurisdiction to request psychological tests
of defendants, and in many states, if a party raises the competency question, an evaluation is required.
Judges are supposed to give the results of an evaluation a lot of weight, but they can also consider other
things, including the defendant's conduct in court. Among the issues that a judge should evaluate is
whether the defendant is capable of:
 proper communication with the defense attorney.
 I understand and process information.
 make decisions about the case and comprehend the aspects of the charges, their gravity, and the
possible penalties.
In most cases, a defendant's lack of IQ, lack of education, language impairments, and communication
difficulties are inadequate to support a finding of incompetency.
International Higher Diploma In Law Page 12 of 20
All Rights reserved
IDM Nations Campus Examination Division
The defendant will most likely be found competent if the court believes that the defendant can
comprehend his or her surroundings, receive and evaluate information, and make decisions based on that
knowledge. Finally, competency is a notoriously low bar—a defendant does not need a deep
understanding of facts to be fit to stand trial.

Task 2
Analyze the difference between sworn evidence
and dock statement along with the pros & cons

Sworn and unsworn evidence are the two types of evidence presented to courts. Before giving evidence,
someone must take an oath or make an affirmation [section 4 of the Evidence Act 1929 (SA)]. Unsworn
evidence is evidence that is delivered without the requirement of taking an oath or making an affirmation
first. Children can give sworn testimony to a court if they have sufficient knowledge of the need to be
truthful that comes with doing so. Even if a youngster is unable to give sworn testimony, he or she may
be permitted to offer unsworn testimony. To give unsworn evidence, a person must grasp the difference
between the truth and a lie, recognize the necessity of speaking the truth, and swear to the court that they
will tell the truth when giving their testimony.
To give sworn evidence, a person must have the same understanding as to when giving unsworn
evidence, but they must also understand that by giving sworn evidence, they acknowledge and accept the
solemnity of taking an oath or making an affirmation, as well as the moral and/or legal consequences of
failing to keep their promise, to tell the truth [section 9(1) Evidence Act 1929].

International Higher Diploma In Law Page 13 of 20

All Rights reserved
IDM Nations Campus Examination Division
When unsworn evidence is presented, the judge must inform the jury of the cause of the lack of sworn
evidence and almost invariably advise the jury that they must exercise caution in choosing whether to
accept it [s 9(4) Evidence Act 1929].
The Evidence Ordinance of Sri Lanka is a comprehensive piece of legislation. It was first enacted in
1895, although just a few revisions have been made to the main enactment.
When we talk about the origin of the dock statement, the central topic concerns
the origins of an accused's ability to make an unsworn statement from the dock, which is not codified in
the Evidence Ordinance or any other written law.
In the early days of English law, a defendant in a criminal process did not have the right to testify in his
defense. The law of England at the time was subjected to criticism that the removal of sworn testimony
by the accused made it difficult for an innocent accused to prove his innocence.
As a result, Section 1 of the Criminal Evidence Act of 1898 altered the situation in England, making an
accused a competent witness of the defense in all criminal prosecutions. Furthermore, Section 1 (h) of the
said Act stipulated that "nothing in this Act shall affect... any right of the person charged with delivering
testimony without being sworn." Thus, it appears that the proviso to Section 1 of the Criminal Evidence
Act No. 1898 is what allowed an accused to make an unsworn statement from the dock when called up
for defense.
The Evidence Ordinance in Sri Lanka accepted it in 1895, even before the Criminal Act of England in
1898 provided for the right of an accused to give sworn evidence.
On this basis, Sri Lankan courts have continued to value dock statements as evidence, as seen in cases
such as 
Queen V. Buddharakkita Thera and Queen V. Kularatne, where it was held that while jurors must be
informed that such a statement must be considered as evidence, subject to the faults that the accused
statement is not made under oath and is not subjected to cross-examination,
In "Kularatne,” the court further held, “But the jury must also be directed that, 
(a) If they believe the unsworn statement,
It must be acted upon.
b) If it raises a reasonable doubt in their minds about the case for the prosecution The defense must
succeed, and
c) That it should not be used against another accused
However, the dock statement's two weaknesses, namely that the statement was not delivered under oath
and that it was not subject to cross-examination or interrogation, have prompted a slew of critiques in all
forms. As a result, it is a weak kind of evidence that, in practice, requires confirmation from other
material witnesses to stand on its own. The right of the accused to make an unsworn statement was
abolished in the United Kingdom by Section 72 of the Criminal Justice Act 1982 due to the dubious
nature of dock statements in terms of evidentiary value. However, the Sri Lankan Courts are compelled
to apply the same legal principle as stated in cases like Vallayan, Buddharakkitha Thera, and
Kularatne until and unless this is explicitly removed from our legislation by the legislature, or is
examined by the Superior Courts. In the case of PunchiRala V. The Queen, it was held that if the
accused makes a statement from the dock during a Supreme Court trial, the judge would be misleading
the jury if he told them that they should consider the accused's statement but that it is of little value
because it is not on oath and not subject to cross-examination.
In the case of Don Samantha Jude Anthony Jayamaha V., the Hon. Attorney General  held;
Whether the evidence is for the defense or the dock
A statement is sufficient to create a doubt that can not be
It cannot be decided in a vacuum or isolation because it needs to be considered in the totality of the
evidence for the prosecution as well as the defense. When the accused's dock statement is supported by
the evidence he or she has presented and proven, if and only if the presence of independent evidence may
indicate that the accused was hospitalized or elsewhere at the time of the crime, the defense may present
an alibi plea through the dock statement.

International Higher Diploma In Law Page 14 of 20

All Rights reserved
IDM Nations Campus Examination Division
The prosecution case can be weak at times. If the accused chooses to exercise his right to silence, the
flaws cannot be highlighted or brought to the notice of the learned trial judge. As a result, an unsworn
statement delivered from the dock at this time will bolster the loopholes, giving the defense a chance to
cast doubt on the prosecution's case.
The burden of proof is placed on the accused to provide an explanation only when a sufficient prima
facie case against the accused has been established, in which case the court may reasonably draw an
unfavorable conclusion from the accused's silence. The Ellenborough Dictum, which was established in
the case of Rex V. Cockraine and calls for an explanation from the accused, is often utilized in Sri
Lankan courts. 17 In this circumstance, the accused may explain the dock, which would have to be
congruent with and supported by the existing evidence in the case. An unsworn statement contradicting
the well-established evidence in the case would be of no use if the defense insists on a thorough "denial."
If backed up by clearly independent facts, a more compelling dock statement may be fashioned. In such a
circumstance, the defense should be able to not only confirm the dock statement but also show the court
to some extent that the prosecution's evidence is devoid of evidentiary value

Task 3
Admissibility of hearsay evidence. Discuss
Introduction
To establish a fact in a criminal prosecution, it is usually essential for a witness who experienced the
event directly to testify.
A witness should generally give evidence orally, talking from their memories. This is to ensure that
witnesses offer "first-hand" testimony regarding events they have personally experienced, rather than
facts they have been informed about by others who are not present in court to testify under oath. It
implies that a witness whose testimony is being challenged by the other side can be cross-examined and
the jury can judge their credibility.
What is hearsay evidence?
Hearsay evidence is evidence that has been passed from one person to another. It's as follows:
1. A statement
A statement is any representation of fact or opinion made by a person by any means with the intent of
persuading another person to believe or act based on the truth of the topic. It can be in the form of a
sketch, a photo-fit, or another pictorial representation. It can be expressed through gestures and/or
behavior (sign language, for example). It must be made by a person, which means that a machine or
technological equipment cannot make a declaration that is hearsay. Images captured by police body
cameras and a computer printout are both admissible as real evidence.

2. Made outside of the court,

Any statements made to the police, other parties, or other courts hearing other proceedings must have
been made outside of the court trying the case.

3. The purpose is to cause another to believe or act on the facts stated.

The purpose of the person who made the statement must have been to cause another person to believe
that the facts stated are true, or to cause another person to act (or a machine to operate) on the basis that
the facts stated are true.

4. The statement is relied on for the truth of the matter stated.

International Higher Diploma In Law Page 15 of 20

All Rights reserved
IDM Nations Campus Examination Division
Examples of hearsay evidence
An example of hearsay would be if person A sees someone climbing into the window of a house. Person
B later learns that the person A saw was C. Hearsay evidence from B of what A told him
The statement itself would be hearsay if A gave his testimony to the police in a witness statement. For his
evidence to be admissible, A would have to give oral testimony in court. When a document is adduced as
evidence that was created by a witness who is not present at the trial, it may be considered hearsay.
Furthermore,
The general rule is that hearsay evidence is not admissible in court as a general rule. This is because
hearsay evidence lacks the typical amount of scrutiny. After all, the speaker of the statement is not
present in court to be cross-examined and considered by the jury.
Evidence is defined in Section 3 of the Evidence Ordinance as "oral evidence" and "documentary
evidence." With the above classification in mind, the next step is to define hearsay evidence. Hearsay
evidence means "that the person who saw heard or perceived the fact is not available, and another person,
whose credibility and competence is equal to that of the person concerned, takes his place in the
circumstances." There are several definitions of the "Rule against Hearsay," which is a practical
application of the "Best Evidence Rule" that is applied differently in different cases depending on the
circumstances. The following analysis is based on the use of hearsay evidence in Sri Lanka as defined by
the evidence ordinance and case law.
"While the Evidence Ordinance makes no mention of hearsay evidence being inadmissible, the whole
Ordinance is based on the idea that this principle is part of our law." Legal writings and concepts include
exceptions. Exceptions are "cases in which a rule, general principle, or other principle does not apply."
There are exceptions to the rule against hearsay in the Evidence Ordinance, but there is no clear section
prohibiting hearsay. The existence of exceptional circumstances suggests that the Testimony Ordinance
discourages the use of hearsay evidence. The following study will consist of such exceptional cases that
it would imply that the previous quote is correct.
In Sri Lanka, hearsay testimony is not often recognized, and Section 60 of the Evidence Ordinance
clearly states that all spoken evidence must be direct. However, no provision in the Evidence Ordinance
specifically states that hearsay evidence should not be accepted in court proceedings. Even though there
are no explicit sections dealing with hearsay evidence, a large number of sections exclude and rarely
allow exceptions for hearsay evidence that corresponds to the ratio of the statement specified in the
approach part. The focus of the investigation will be on the extent to which hearsay evidence is made
legally significant by evidence ordinances and case law.
The disadvantages of hearsay testimony have caused courts to dismiss it, and a considerable number of
cases will confirm the opinion that hearsay should not be permitted as valid evidence. The evidence
ordinance must be given priority when considering the status of hearsay evidence, and the following
analysis includes a comparison of hearsay evidence and its acceptability under the evidence ordinance.

Admissibility of hearsay evidence

The ordinance considers hearsay evidence in three areas:
1. Res gestae (Section 6) 
2. common intention (Section 10).
3. Exceptions from section 17 to section 39 
According to Res gestae, "the events, circumstances, remarks, etc. that relate to a particular case,
especially as providing acceptable evidence in a court of law," Is hearsay evidence admissible simply
because it is relevant, as defined by section 5 of the Evidence Ordinance, in such situations? Depending
on the circumstances, the response could be "Yes" or "No." In the instance of Lejzor Teper, direct res
gestae is needed. Section 6 implies that hearsay evidence will be admitted in the depicted situation,
which requires the disputing parties and spectators to say or do important things, which is a window for
hearsay evidence to be labeled as relevant.
However, the argument is that bystanders who saw or heard something should report it to the court as
witnesses, making it direct evidence rather than hearsay, and therefore, it can be claimed that this part did
International Higher Diploma In Law Page 16 of 20
All Rights reserved
IDM Nations Campus Examination Division
not allow hearsay evidence to be valid while affirming the legitimacy of direct evidence. The headnote of
the landmark Privy Council case is "Evidence – Hearsay"—admissible to prove the fact that comment
was uttered.
Subramaniam v. Public prosecutor stated The decision established a system for determining whether
evidence is hearsay or not.
When the purpose of the evidence is to prove the truth of what is said in the statement, inadmissible and
hearsay
When it is proposed to use evidence to prove the fact that a statement was made rather than the truth of
the statement, it is admissible and not hearsay.
Supporting this viewpoint, R. Kumaraswamy also supports this viewpoint. There have been numerous
cases involving the applicability of section 6 to hearsay evidence, and differing opinions have been
expressed. However, it is apparent that section 6 does not accept hearsay evidence, as argued in the
landmark case of Subramaniam v. Public Prosecutor.
   
A common intention is shared by a large number of people. Can a statement made by a party to an act
disclosing such purpose be used as evidence against the wrongdoer? The use of common intention in
hearsay testimony was advanced in 
Mirza Akbar v. King-Emperor, which corresponds to section 10 of the Sri Lankan Trust Ordinance.
Things said, done, or written while the conspiracy was in progress are important as proof of the common
intention, once reasonable grounds for believing in its existence have been demonstrated. However,
holding that any narrative statement or confession made to a third party after the common intention or
conspiracy has ceased to exist is admissible against the other party would be a completely different
matter. There is no common purpose among the conspirators to which the statement can allude. Peris v.
Silva, a major case in Sri Lanka involving this section, with facts and a decision that is comparable to the
one above.
Act of 1995 on Evidence: The Special Purposes Act spells out exactly when hearsay is and isn't allowed.
Sections 59 (1), (2), and (2A) spell out the exceptions to the hearsay rule.
In conclusion, even though it is not mentioned in the Trust Ordinance, it is reasonable to conclude that
hearsay evidence is generally not admissible. The ordinance allows for exceptional conditions to employ
hearsay evidence as valid proof of the fact in question because the drafter did not intend for hearsay to be
treated as valid evidence, as evidenced by the exceptions stated in the analysis section. 
Hearsay evidence is not admissible, according to the majority of case law. "hearsay evidence in an
affidavit is not sufficient to enable a magistrate to issue a warrant under the Gaming Ordinance,"
according to Silva v. Silva. Letters sent by the wife to the core respondent but not delivered were barred
from being utilized by the husband in the divorce court in Eliatamby v. Eliatamby. 
The Evidence Ordinance does not state anywhere that hearsay evidence is inadmissible, but the whole
Ordinance proceeds on the assumption that this principle is part of our law"...

International Higher Diploma In Law Page 17 of 20

All Rights reserved
IDM Nations Campus Examination Division
Task 4
Discuss the exceptions to the burden of proof.
In the law of evidence, the burden of proof is a complex and ambiguous term. The burden of producing
evidence means that the party who cites particular facts to establish its claim must likewise produce the
evidence to prove these facts. This burden is determined by the claim's substantive law. In certain
scenarios, permissible presumptions and legal standards might shift the burden of proof.
The burden of proof, on the other hand, kicks in at the end of the evidence hearing if there
are any remaining uncertainties.This is simply to acknowledge that the evidence is insufficient to
persuade the jury or the judge and that the party who bears the burden of pleading and providing facts
favorable to itself, as well as giving evidence, also bears the so-called burden of conviction.
Unlike civil cases, where the burden of proof for facts supporting a claim is normally borne
by the plaintiff unless it has been moved to the defendant through rules or presumptions, in criminal
cases, the prosecution carries the burden of proof for all relevant facts. In both cases, such a high level of
probability is necessary that, to the extent that this is possible in everyday life, questions are removed and
probability approaches certitude. The degree of probability required in civil cases in common-law
countries is lower than that required in criminal cases.
There are two types of burdens of proof: the persuasive burden, which is satisfied when a party meets the
appropriate standard set by the court; Depending on the facts of the case, both parties may have to bear
the burden of proof. The second is the evidential burden, which requires a party to present sufficient
evidence for the court to assess the matter at hand. These burdens are a matter of law, and they will apply
to any question brought before the court.
The primary rule in criminal proceedings is that the prosecution bears the burden of proof to win their
case. It was stated in the instance of Slater v. HMA that the jury was advised that the presumption of
innocence, which is commonly used in criminal cases, applied to the appellant (because of his
questionable character) with less force than it would to a man whose character was not suspect. This, in
our opinion, amounted to a clear legal misdirection. The presumption of innocence applies to everyone
charged with a crime in the same way, and it can only be overturned by evidence relevant to proving the
offense for which he is charged. Due to the presumption of innocence, the evidence burden is particularly
crucial in criminal cases.
It was once considered that the accused was obligated to establish "special defenses," but the case
of Lambie v. HMA clarified that this is not the case and that the prosecution is responsible for proving
the defense beyond a reasonable doubt. The only thing the accused has to do is meet the evidential
burden, which consists of pointing to some evidence that allows the defense to be presented. When using
a "special defense," the accused must also give notice. In criminal cases, there are certain exceptions to
the usual rule that the prosecution bears the burden of proof. With four exceptions, the burden of proof
will be shifted. The first is when the accused pleads a special defense of insanity or diminished
responsibility. They are called special defenses because they require the accused to give written notice to
the court that these defenses will be used so that the prosecution can understand the line of evidence the
defense will take. According to Hume, when an accused tries to plead insanity, the burden of proof will
be on the accused. However, the burden of proof would shift to the accused. This is because it would be
extremely difficult for the prosecution to refute this defense. After all, the prosecution cannot compel the
accused to undergo psychiatric testing; thus, the accused bears the burden of proof. Other particular
defenses, such as an alibi, self-defense, or incrimination, constitute the second exception to the general
rule. It is not necessary for the accused to verify the available evidence. The burden of proof in civil
disputes is said to reside with "he who asserts a right granted by law must prove the facts essential to
establish it," which allows us to understand that the burden of proof will typically fall on the pursuer.
When dealing with distinct issues, the burden of proof may shift between the parties; this is most
International Higher Diploma In Law Page 18 of 20
All Rights reserved
IDM Nations Campus Examination Division
common when the defender is claiming particular defenses (for example, contributory negligence). The
rationale for this is that in a civil case, the parties are not typically obliged to prove a negative, so the
burden of proof will fall on the defender to prove rather than the pursuer to disprove.
            There are statutory exceptions to the general rule that the pursuer bears the burden
of proof in civil disputes. Nimmo v Alexander Cowan & Sons Ltd. The Factories Act of 1962 was the
statute under consideration in this case, and it dealt with safe working procedures. The purser had the
burden of proof in proving that the working circumstances were unsafe, but the pursuer was not obliged
to prove that it was not "reasonably practicable" to make them safer, and if the defense wanted to rely on
this, the burden of proof would move to the defender.
In any case, the standard of proof specifies the amount and quality of evidence that must be shown for
the burden of proof to be lifted. This threshold is known as "beyond a reasonable doubt" in criminal
trials, which means that the prosecution must show the accused's guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. It's
been tough to define what constitutes "beyond a reasonable doubt," and there's no way to put a numerical
value on it. It has, however, been regarded as "more than a purely speculative or intellectual doubt."
When the burden of proof in criminal proceedings shifts to the pursuer, the question of what standard of
proof to utilize must be addressed. Lord Justice-Clerk Thomson's charge to the jury in the case of HMA v
Mitchell states the common law position about the defenses of insanity and diminished responsibility:
Because there is a presumption of sanity in our legal system, the burden of proof is
on the defense. As a result, the proof requirement changes from beyond a reasonable doubt to the balance
of probabilities. In criminal cases, the burden of proof will stay with the Crown, and if the trier has a
reasonable doubt, the accused should be acquitted because the Crown has failed to meet its convincing
burden. When a statute places the burden of proof on the pursuer, the standard of proof is also on the
balance of probability.

References
"Sworn And Unsworn Evidence' (Lawhandbook.sa.gov.au)
<https://lawhandbook.sa.gov.au/ch13s07s08.php> 

(Sllchrm.lk, 2013) <https://sllchrm.lk/manurawa/doc/31).ZamzamIsmail.pdf> accessed 2 may

2013(Sllchrm.lk, 2013) <https://sllchrm.lk/manurawa/doc/31).ZamzamIsmail.pdf> accessed 14 February
2013

(2022) <https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Sumedha-Mahawanniarachchi-2/publication/
336922849_Hearsay_Evidence_-A_Comparative_Analysis/links/5dbaecdb4585151435d6ea9c/Hearsay-
Evidence-A-Comparative-Analysis.pdf>

"Hearsay" Evidence." Findlaw.N.p., n.d. Web. 20 July 2015.

Widanapathirana S, 'Hearsay Evidence In Sri Lanka' (Academia.edu, 2022)
https://www.academia.edu/28705260/Hearsay_Evidence_in_Sri_Lanka >

International Higher Diploma In Law Page 19 of 20

All Rights reserved
IDM Nations Campus Examination Division
'Evidence - Swearing' (Encyclopedia Britannica)
https://www.britannica.com/topic/evidence-law/Swearing > 

Burden Of Proof In Criminal And Common Cases Law Essay' (Ukessays.com)

<https://www.ukessays.com/essays/law/burden-of-proof-in-criminal-and-common-cases-law-
essay.php>accessed 7 July 2017
Journal
(1920) 22.N.L.R. 27 
(1913) 17. 139; N.L.R.
(1969) 75.N.L.R. 172

International Higher Diploma In Law Page 20 of 20

All Rights reserved
IDM Nations Campus Examination Division