LWB432 Evidence Murray McCarthy

Week 8
D O C U M E N T A R Y EVIDENCE

General

 Before a document is admitted into evidence it must be:

(a) Relevant;
 Documents are subject to the same rules of relevance as every other item of evidence
is.
 If you're relying on the content of a document then you've got to show that its content is
relevant in the sense that it rationally effects an assessment of the probability of the
existence of a fact in issue if believed.

(b) Not breach any exclusionary rule, (eg., not hearsay); OR

 Documents are subject to the same exclusionary rules as other items of evidence.
 The principle exclusionary rule w.r.t documents is the hearsay rule.
Myers v. DPP
- where a document would have proved the crowns case but was inadmissible due to
hearsay, despite its weight

(c) Be within an exception to the relevant rule.

 In addition, there are special rules as to how the document is proved.

 The Evidence Acts contain extended definitions of documents and they incorporate
into the notion of the document all sorts of things that the CL do not.
- Definitions apply for any matter under the Evidence Acts but NOT under the CL.
- Therefore you must determine whether you are making a point of admissibility or non-
admissibility under the statute or whether it is under the CL.

 “Producing” and “Tendering a document”

There are two aspects of the use to documents in court:

 Production
 This is how the court gets to look at a document.
 You normally produce documents through a witness who is in the box.
 You get the witness to identify the document and to explain its relevance and
significance in the case. This process is known as production. But at this point the
document is not yet evidence b/c it has only been made available for inspection.

 Tender
 Once document has been produced, if you wish to tender it, ( put into evidence and
make it available for consideration), you need to establish its relevance and its
admissibility.
 In the production process the witness explained what the document was and therefore
that covers the relevance point. The next crucial question might be 'Is that your
signature on the document?' The answer 'yes' to the question makes the document
admissible which means that the hearsay rule doesn't apply.
 It is considered to be the evidence of the witness. They are incorporating the
document into their own testimony. It is no longer a statement from outside the court
but from the witness box.
 It is the act of tender which places the document before the court as an item of
evidence.

Best Evidence Rule

Page 1
LWB432 Evidence Murray McCarthy
GENERAL - Best Evidence Rule
 For the content of a document to be received as evidence the document has to be the original and
a copy will NOT do.
 It applies to cases in which direct reliance is placed on the words used in a document
 The rule does NOT prevent reference being made to the terms of a document for the purpose
of identifying it.

Queensland
 Best Evidence rule exists
 There are however many exceptions

Commonwealth
 It doesn't exist under the CEA b/c s.51 CEA abolishes it.

Exceptions to the General Rule

 Cases where the contents of a document MAY be proved by secondary evidence, eg. by a copy
or by oral evidence of content.
1. Opponent's failure to produce document after service on him or her of notice to produce.
2. Lost document or destroyed document – must convince the judge on voir dire and tender the
document.
3. Stranger's lawful refusal to produce document.
4. Production of original impossible.
5. Public documents.
6. Statutory Provisions:

 Copies: s.116 QEA, s.48(1)(b) CEA

 The effect of s.116 QEA is that a photocopy of a document is admissible to the same
extent as the original without the need to account for the whereabouts of the original (the
photocopy doesn't have to be certified or examined).

 You still have to show relevance and that no exclusionary rule is infringed. Moreover, you
also have to prove the photocopy that, through a witness, it is not hearsay and is
admissible, either b/c it bears the signature of the witness or the witness is willing to give
evidence that he/she adopted its content as being true.

 W.r.t the CEA, particularly s.48(1)(b), virtually any copy in any form is admissible to the
same extent as the original.

Proof of the Execution of Private Documents

 EXECUTION, ATTESTATION

 Execution is the proper signature of a document

 The law of evidence does not require “execution”
 Substantive law often does, e.g. land K

 Attestation – witnessing of signature

 E.g Succession Act requires 2 attesting witnesses on will

 PUBLIC DOCUMENTS
 NOT necessary to prove execution of a public doc. – QEA ss41-43 and CEA ss153-
159

Page 2
LWB432 Evidence Murray McCarthy
 PRIVATE DOCUMENTS
 Court will require evidence that a private document was duly executed, unless it is
more than 20yrs old and comes from proper custody (presumption of formal validity).
QEA s 62.

 The due execution of a private document is proved by showing that:

i. it was signed or otherwise acknowledged (by initialing or putting his or her mark
on the document after the contents have been read to or by the person) as
correct by the person by whom it purports to have been signed AND
ii. if required, that it was attested.(ie that the signature was witnessed)
 NB that a document will be regarded as signed if a person has authorised another to
sign for her or him, or if the person has personally affixed his of her signature by
means of a rubber stamp. (Re Sneddon)
 Read CEA s 150.

(a) Proof of Handwriting s.59 QEA (no counterpart in the CEA)

 Proof of handwriting maybe given by testimonial evidence, opinion or comparison s59 QEA.

 Options:
(a) Call expert witness
- ie, you can call a handwriting expert who can be shown a known example of
the signature or the handwriting of the person in question, can be shown the
disputed example, and can apply his/her technical knowledge to find points of
similarity and come up with a probability
(b) Call person who is familiar with the person’s handwriting – don’t compare, just look at
the disputed signature.
(c) Known, genuine signature given to tribunal of fact and given to tribunal of fact to make
up own mind.

 Note that the above three are not mutually exclusive, ie, you can have any combination
of those three

(b) Proof of Attestation

 Attestation is the proper witnessing of a document

 Execution overcomes hearsay rule therefore there are few instances where
attestation is required

Wills
 If it becomes necessary to prove the due execution of a will, it is essential to
call one of the attesting witnesses.
 With proof of due execution and attestation a copy will be proved if the original
is lost or destroyed.
 If all witnesses are dead, insane, beyond the jurisdiction or cannot be traced
then proof of the handwriting of at least one of them is required.
 If probate is sought in common form, i.e. via the Registrar these requirements
do not apply, though it will not be granted where the will is not prima facie in
all respects.

Other Documents
 Different documents have different requirements under their corresponding
Acts
 No general CL rule that a doc requires to be witnessed, a signature is
sufficient, but it does assist is a document is witnessed
 Other documents may be proved by the testimony of one of the subscribing
witnesses, if any. Read QEA ss 60, 61. Read CEA s 149. Unless specified
by statute, most documents and certainly most private documents do not
require attestation at all.

Page 3
LWB432 Evidence Murray McCarthy

QUEENSLAND
Proof of instrument to validity of which attestation is not necessary
60. It shall not be necessary to prove by the attesting witness any instrument
to the validity of which attestation is not requisite, and such instrument may
be proved by admission or otherwise as if there had been no attesting witness
thereto.

Proof of instrument to validity of which attestation is necessary

61.(1) Any instrument to the validity of which attestation is requisite may,
instead of being proved by an attesting witness, be proved in the manner in
which it might be proved if no attesting witness were alive.
(2) Nothing in this section shall apply to the proof of wills or other testamentary documents.

COMMONWEALTH

149 Attestation of documents

It is not necessary to adduce the evidence of an attesting witness to a document (not being a
testamentary document) to prove that the document was signed or attested as it purports to
have been signed or attested.
Note: Section 182 gives this section a wider application in relation to Commonwealth
records.

Stamp duty

 Most jurisdictions have the equivalent of a Stamp Act which effectively requires that before a
document is admissible in evidence it has to have the correct amount of duty paid on it. That
is, before a document can have any legal effect it has to have the correct amount of duty paid
on it.

 If duty is not paid within the time which the Act prescribes (usually a number of days from the
date the document bears) then enormous penalties are imposed.

Admissibility of Extrinsic Evidence Affecting the Contents of a

Document
 Once a transaction has been embodied in a document, may evidence be given of terms other
than those the document mentions?

 GENERAL RULE: Extrinsic evidence IS admissible - to resolve an ambiguity in a written

document but not to cut down or extend plain meaning: Codelfa
Codelfa Constructions Pty Ltd v State Rail Authority of NSW
- Extrinsic evidence.
- People who come together to make an agreement in writing and whether evidence
other than the written agreement can be used to establish the terms of the written
agreement.
- Recognised an assumption that if the agreement is reduced to writing it contains their
entire agreement.
- Extrinsic evidence of other terms is not acceptable.
- per Mason J (with whom Stephen and Wilson JJ agreed)

 Rebuttable assumption if the parties agreed to terms to be partly in writing and partly oral.
 Can then adduce evidence of oral evidence.
 Where cannot establish that the parties intended the agreement to be partly oral and partly
written in that instance you can get outside evidence if the writing is ambiguous.
 Can get evidence to clarify what the parties meant by the writing itself.

Page 4
LWB432 Evidence Murray McCarthy
REAL EVIDENCE
 The difference b/w real evidence and documents is that with real evidence you're
relying on an article or a thing simply for what you can see by looking at it; or, on
appropriate occasions, for what you can hear by listening to it, not in terms of
assertions, but in terms of sounds as facts.

Definition of Real Evidence

 Real evidence refers to all evidence other than oral testimony and documents - CEA s 52.

52 Adducing of other evidence not affected

This Act (other than this Part) does not affect the operation of any Australian law
or rule of practice so far as it permits evidence to be adduced in a way other than
by witnesses giving evidence or documents being tendered in evidence.

 The object or thing tendered must be RELEVANT.

 Must demonstrate RELEVANCE

Presentation of Real Evidence

 Presentation of real evidence involves testimony of a witness who can relate the real evidence
to the issues in the case and who will state its relevance.
 NB. Make sure that real evidence is present when case begins.

 It may be advisable to preserve real evidence by a pre-emptive strike - Anton Pillar

Order; search warrants.

Anton Pillar
 An Anton Pillar order is an application to take measures to prevent the
destruction of property.
 It's given in civil trials b/c in civil trials you can't get a search warrant.
 if granted the order enables you to knock on ones door and demand that they hand
over certain things:
 CANNOT enter the premises unless invited;
 CANNOT search premises;
 CANNOT seize materials;
If the person breaches the order by failing to comply they are in contempt
of court.
 It is an equitable order and two things must be established before it will be granted:
1. That the person to whom the order is directed is in possession of
relevant material; AND
2. That there is a real likelihood that the material will be destroyed

Search Warrant:
 Can enter, search and seize articles
 must sufficiently particularise the matters to be searched for
 Federal or state police are granted search warrants by a judge.
 Only available in criminal proceedings

O 57 r8:
 order in chambers for production of real evidence
 enables you to make an application to the Judge in chambers to secure a document or
the preservation of a document.
 Use when delivered up to the Court
 Example: of where this order is relevant: an action for breach of copyright – crt needs
those documents which infringed the copyright in order to determine the amount of
conversion damages (which is based on the number of times copyright was infringed)

Page 5
LWB432 Evidence Murray McCarthy
 The real practical difference b/w anton pillar and O 57 is that O 57 is not an ex
parte procedure, ie, you have to give notice to the other side.
 Of course, the giving of notice can often alert the other side and there will be
people who will destroy the material which they've just been alerted as to your
interest in.
 The beauty of the anton pillar order is that it is an ex parte procedure, ie, the
other side don't get any notice, you get the order, and the first thing they know
is when you come knocking on their door.
 To get an anton pillar order you have to prove that this material is significant in
terms of proof of your case and there is a very real possibility that the other
side will interfere with it or even destroy it.

Views, Experiments and Demonstrations

VIEW
 A view refers to a visit to a relevant place where the incident occurred
 It should not be confused with the observation of a demonstration or experiment.

 REQUIREMENTS:
(i) Everyone must go at the same time (Judge, Jury, Counsel)
(j) At the view the counsel must be allowed to point out relevant aspects of the site

CL & QLD
 At CL (and thus in Qld law), what is seen at the view is NOT EVIDENCE in the case.

 The jury should not use the view in order to make their decision : Scott v. Numrukah
Corporation
Scott v Numurkah Corporation
- In this case the town hall was being used for dual purposes.
- There were complaints that music in the dance hall disrupted the theater and was
leading to a loss of money - action in nuisance.
- The court sat in the theatre and set up a band to play while they tested the noise from
the cinema
- There were no other people there to absorb the sound
- QUESTION: is this a view
Held:
- This is NOT a view but constituted a reconstruction.
- There was no film playing at the time and no people, therefore not admissible because
there was nothing to compare and therefore not a real view or demonstration.
- Must sufficiently reproduce conditions – only the court and the band were there so this
was not proximate.
- Procedure was invalid.
- Demonstrations are permissible but are subject to different rules that are not complied
with here must have the consent of all the parties.
- A view is at the discretion of the judge.

 If you conduct a demonstration it must be very closely proximate to the conditions the subject of
the proceedings.
Burles
- Typing demonstration held in court room to show how fast a person could type.

COMMONWEALTH
 CEA s 53, s 54. A view will be evidence in the case unlike in QLD and reasonable
inferences can be draw from a view directly on matters at issue. CF CL which is completely
opposite.

s.53 Views
(1) A judge may, on application, order that a demonstration, experiment or inspection be held.
(2) A judge is not to make an order unless he or she is satisfied that:
(a) the parties will be given a reasonable opportunity to be present; and
(b) the judge and, if there is a jury, the jury will be present.
(3) Without limiting the matters that the judge may take into account in deciding whether to make an order, the judge
is to take into account the following:
(a) whether the parties will be present;

Page 6
LWB432 Evidence Murray McCarthy
(b) whether the demonstration, experiment or inspection will, in the court’s opinion, assist the court in
resolving issues of fact or understanding the evidence;
(c) the danger that the demonstration, experiment or inspection might be unfairly prejudicial, might be
misleading or confusing or might cause or result in undue waste of time;
(d) in the case of a demonstration—the extent to which the demonstration will properly reproduce the
conduct or event to be demonstrated;
(e) in the case of an inspection—the extent to which the place or thing to be inspected has materially
altered.
(4) The court (including, if there is a jury, the jury) is not to conduct an experiment in the course of its
deliberations.
 This section does not apply in relation to the inspection of an exhibit by the court or, if there is a jury,
by the jury.

54 Views to be evidence
The court (including, if there is a jury, the jury) may draw any reasonable inference from what it sees, hears or
otherwise notices during a demonstration, experiment or inspection

 if the evidence of a witness in the box is contradicted by evidence seen at the view it impinges on
the CREDIT of the witness but to what extent is unclear.
 Who can say the site looks exactly the same at the view as it looked on the day in question

DEMONSTRATION
 A demonstration is evidence on the issues of the case unlike a view
 A demonstration has certain requirements at CL:
 It shouldn’t be allowed unless it very closely approximates the conditions that prevailed at the time
in question.
 Reconstructions attempt to emulate the event complained of. A demonstration is something less
than that. It does not have to take place at the particular location, it can happen at the court.
 Example - It might be a plaintiff in a personal injuries case demonstrating to the court
the extent of their injuries by attempting to walk across the courtroom. Thereby
showing that since the defendant’s motor car ran into them, they now walk with a limp.
 If it is done in the courtroom, strictly a demonstration does not have to be by consent
of all parties. The judge can allow it on the application of one. If it is a demonstration
outside the courtroom, consent of all is required

RECONSTRUCTION
 A reconstruction can occur in the court room or outside the court room.
 It's usually only conducted by the consent of all parties for it to be evidence.
 It's akin to a demonstration, but what it does is more to seek to replicate conditions which prevailed
at the relevant time which have resulted in the case being brought to court (hence the description
'reconstruction'). What is seen at a reconstruction is evidence in the case.
Scott v Numurkah
- held that things had miscarried, not only had there been a reconstruction held when all
parties did not consent, but the reconstruction did not sufficiently approximate the
conditions that prevailed on the night complained of.

EXPERIMENTS
 Experiments can be carried out on exhibits.
 If one side has been allowed to test the exhibit then the other side can as well.
 Court can order supervision by a court officer.
 Must lodge an affidavit stating exactly what you want to do and that you will not harm the exhibit.
 The party wishing to conduct the experiment must satisfy the court that the process will not
damage the exhibit.
 Court must observe integrity of the evidence until determination of the issue.
 PROBLEM: usually the Crown has all the evidence and is in a position to test the exhibits.

 Civil Cases: The defence can rely on o58 r7 of the Supreme Court rules – the SC may order that
any relevant material be delivered up and dealt with as the court so determines

 Criminal Cases: Criminal Practice Rules (1865) o1 r1 states that in so far as practical the rule of
the SC for use in civil cases are to be employed in the conduct of criminal cases – therefore, can

Page 7
LWB432 Evidence Murray McCarthy
use o58 r7 for criminal cases.

Exhibits
R v Ekert
- Def committed for murder applied for an order that the under weapon be examined by his own expert, the Crown
had already inspected the weapon.
Held:
- “When an order for inspection is made it should place the D so far as is reasonably possible and subject to
proper safeguards, on an equal footing with the crown. If the crown has conducted experiments with an exhibit
the D’s advisers should, subject to such safeguards, be allowed to conduct the same experiment or to dismantle
the exhibit, the reason should be stated and the proposed experiments described in detail in its application. The
application should also state with as much particularity as possible when, where and in whose presence it is
proposed that the exhibit be examined.”
- The court may order inspection by a D of a crown exhibit as to which a question may arise in the course of a
criminal trial.
- Court allowed the examination by the defendant’s experts of the weapon.

Electronic Evidence

A) TAPE RECORDINGS

 These are commonly used in criminal proceedings.

 The Telecommunications Interception Act regulates the lawfulness of recording telephone
conversations. It provides that unless a recording is made in accordance with its requirements,
it is not admissible evidence.
- The requirements are that you have to get a warrant from a judge of the Federal Court.
- As to the status of a tape recording, it lies in a half way house between being a
document and being an item of real evidence

 Tape recorded sounds are admissible in evidence provided that:

1. there is testimony to identify the voices on the tape by someone present at the time of
the recording; and
2. the provenance of the tape is proved. (ie hasn’t been tampered with)
Butera v DPP
- At the trial of the A on a count of conspiracy to traffic heroin a tape recording of a conversation
among some alleged co-conspirators was admitted into evidence.
- Prosecution had tape recordings derived from lawful bugs, the quality of the tape was poor and
it was in a foreign language.
- Tape played to jury, interpreters gave oral evidence of their translations and verified their
written translations. Each of the translations was admitted into evidence as a documentary
exhibit.
- A convicted and appealed on the ground that the written translation should not have been
admitted into evidence.
- TJ: admitted the tape recordings and their translations into evidence.
- Tape was played to the jury and an interpreter gave oral evidence concerning the tape and
then verified the written translation.
- The elements for a tape recording to be allowed:
1. Voices on the tape must be identified to the court by someone who was present
at the time of the recording; and
2. The provenance of the tape is satisfactorily proved (if called on to do so)
- ie it is evidence that what was said in the case was said but don’t declare tape to be real
evidence, therefore still a hearsay hurdle to be overcome.
Held:
- In this case a departure from the ordinary practice was justified, and it was appropriate to admit
the translations into evidence and permit the jury to have them in the jury room, it would have
been all but impossible for the jury to appreciate the cross examination otherwise. Appeal
dismissed.

 Video tapes are also admissible as real evidence: Sitek

 Don’t need to positively prove the tape wasn’t tampered with but if tampering is an issue then
have to prove by use of a sound engineer
 Just because the tape was edited doesn’t mean that it is sinister
 An original tape or copy of a tape is treated as real evidence
 Read CEA s 48(1)

Page 8
LWB432 Evidence Murray McCarthy

Transcripts of Recordings
 Written transcripts recordings of what was on the tape are often offered to the jury
 The evidence is what is heard on the tape or if it is a video what is seen of the tape,
transcripts are not copies.
 When there is a tape the best evidence would be playing the tape in court so that the
sounds are reproduced, however this may not always be practical.
 Generally it is impermissible to tender a transcript.
 However, the judge in exercising a discretion may allow the transcript in where
the tape is difficult to make out, the tape is too long or where the tape is in a
foreign language.
 A transcript is not allowed as evidence where the tape itself is short and intelligible:
Bulter

Foreign Language
 A translation must be taken directly from the tape and not from a transcript
 Practice - 2 stage process:
1. tape must be played for few seconds: and
2. then stopped and translated orally by the translator so that the jury is
satisfied that words and sounds were spoken on the tape
 This evidence would have to be sworn by the translator.
 only then can the jury turn to the written transcript of translation
EXCEPTION:
 Where tape is extraordinarily long, the transcript may be relied upon by the
jury as evidence of that which is on the tape: Butera v DPP

Telecommunications:
 Recordings of telephone bugging are governed by Telecommunications Interceptions
Act
 It is illegal to bug phones unless you have a Federal Search Warrant
 State police don’t have the power therefore the bugging done by them can’t be used in
court
 Material gained illegally is inadmissible to begin with
 NB under the Invasion Privacy Act any party to a conversion may tape a conversation
without telling the other party. But any person not a party to the conversation can’t
tape and it is an offence under s.43 and the recording is inadmissible

(B) PHOTOGRAPHS AND FILMS

 The reception of photographs as a reproduction of a scene obtained by prints from a negative
by means of mechanical and chemical devices has long acceptance.
 In Queensland photographs are admitted as real evidence s.48 CEA: Sitek although
additionally they qualify as “documents” for the purposes of the Evidence Acts in other
jurisdictions.
Sitek
- A charged and convicted of misappropriation of property whilst gambling at Jupiter’s casino.
- He handed the croupier $3,000 and received $6,000 if gaming chips by mistake.
- It was alleged that he retained the chips knowing of the mistake.
- The incident was recorded on surveillance cameras.
- E was the operator of the surveillance camera and gave evidence of what she saw as
consistent with above.
Held:
- Evidence of the plaintiff who saw an event take place on a video tape is admissible.
- Evidence of E as to what she saw of the transaction was admissible as eyewitness evidence,
as when one looks through a telescope.
- It was permissible for E to refresh her memory by reference to the video tape.
- That a person may give admissible evidence of matters which he saw on a video film and the
video film was itself admissible although additionally they qualify as “documents” for the
purposes of the Evidence Acts in other jurisdictions.
- The video tape itself (and photos) are real evidence and are admissible.
- They do not have to be incorporated as part of a W’s evidence testimonially .

 Sitek is important for the declaration that it makes b/c in other jurisdictions photographs are
treated as documents and they fall within the definition of documents in the s.3 QEA;

Page 9
LWB432 Evidence Murray McCarthy
 The effect of treating them as documents is, of course, that they can fall foul of the hearsay
rule.
 If you treat a photograph, not as a document, but as an item of real evidence, then you're able
to draw inferences as to the facts in issue in the case simply by looking at it.
 Certainly a photograph contains a representation of things which were seen by the camera and
the photographer when the photo was taken, but you don't have the hearsay problem with it as
a previous representation if you don't treat it as a document.

 The effect of Sitek is that photographs can never be hearsay in Qld.

(C) COMPUTER OUTPUT

 QEA s 95 makes statements produced by computers admissible as evidence of their contents
subject to certain conditions. Study this section in detail.
 Construct computer graphics or charts or video, multimedia event to purport to reconstruct
circumstances of case – subject to the same rules – must approximate circumstances at the
time.

Admissibility of statements produced by computers

s.95(1) In any proceeding where direct oral evidence of a fact would be admissible, any
statement contained in a document produced by a computer and tending to establish that fact
shall, subject to this part, be admissible as evidence of that fact, if it is shown that the conditions
mentioned in subsection_(2) are satisfied in relation to the statement and computer in question.
(2) The said conditions areÑ
(a) that the document containing the statement was produced by the computer during a period over
which the computer was used regularly to store or process information for the purposes of any
activities regularly carried on over that period, whether for profit or not, by any person; and
(b) that over that period there was regularly supplied to the computer in the ordinary course of those
activities information of the kind contained in the statement or of the kind from which the
information so contained is derived; and
(c) that throughout the material part of that period the computer was operating properly or, if not,
that any respect in which it was not operating properly or was out of operation during that part of
that period was not such as to affect the production of the document or the accuracy of its
contents; and
(d) that the information contained in the statement reproduces or is derived from information
supplied to the computer in the ordinary course of those activities.
(3) Where over a period the function of storing or processing information for the purposes of
any activities regularly carried on over that period as mentioned in subsection_(2)(a) was
regularly performed by computers, whether
(a) by a combination of computers operating over that period; or
(b) by different computers operating in succession over that period; or
(c) by different combinations of computers operating in succession over that period; or
(d) in any other manner involving the successive operation over that period, in whatever
order, of 1 or more computers and 1 or more combinations of computers;
all the computers used for that purpose during that period shall be treated for the purposes of this
part as constituting a single computer and references in this part to a computer shall be construed
accordingly.
(4) In any proceeding where it is desired to give a statement in evidence by virtue of this
section, a certificate doing all or any of the following things, that is to say
(a) identifying the document containing the statement and describing the manner in which it was
produced;
(b) giving such particulars of any device involved in the production of that document as may be
appropriate for the purpose of showing that the document was produced by a computer;
(c) dealing with any of the matters to which the conditions mentioned in subsection_(2)
relate;
and purporting to be signed by a person occupying a responsible position in relation to the
operation of the relevant device or the management of the relevant activities (whichever is
appropriate) shall be evidence of the matters stated in the certificate and for the purposes of this

Page 10
LWB432 Evidence Murray McCarthy
subsection it shall be sufficient for a matter to be stated to the best of the knowledge and belief of
the person stating it.
(5) Any person who in a certificate tendered in evidence by virtue of subsection_(4) wilfully
makes a statement material in that proceeding which the person knows to be false or does not
believe to be true is guilty of an offence.

Maximum penalty20 penalty units or 1 years imprisonment.

(6) For the purposes of this part:

(a) information shall be taken to be supplied to a computer if it is supplied thereto in any appropriate
form and whether it is so supplied directly or (with or without human intervention) by means of
any appropriate equipment;
(b) where, in the course of activities carried on by any person, information is supplied with a view to
its being stored or processed for the purposes of those activities by a computer operated
otherwise than in the course of those activities, that information, if duly supplied to that
computer, shall be taken to be supplied to it in the course of those activities;
(c) a document shall be taken to have been produced by a computer whether it was produced by it
directly or (with or without human intervention) by means of any appropriate equipment.
(7) Subject to subsection_(3), in this section
computer means any device for storing and processing information, and any reference to
information being derived from other information is a reference to its being derived
therefrom by calculation, comparison or any other process.

Page 11