Exclusion of Admissible Evidence

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
David Johnston ◽  
Glenn Hutton
Keyword(s):  
Admissible Evidence

Digital Chain of Custody

2017 ◽  
Vol 7 (7) ◽  
pp. 117
Author(s):  
Matthew N.O. Sadiku ◽  
Adebowale E. Shadare ◽  
Sarhan M. Musa
Keyword(s):  
Digital Evidence ◽  
Chain Of Custody ◽  
Digital Investigation ◽  
A Chain ◽  
Admissible Evidence ◽  
Investigation Process

Digital chain of custody is the record of preservation of digital evidence from collection to presentation in the court of law. This is an essential part of digital investigation process.  Its key objective is to ensure that the digital evidence presented to the court remains as originally collected, without tampering. The chain of custody is important for admissible evidence in court. Without a chain of custody, the opposing attorney can challenge or dismiss the evidence presented. The aim of this paper is to provide a brief introduction to the concept of digital chain custody.

Politics of Evidence and Right to Health Care in India: The Challenges in Fixing Accountability of Medical Doctors in Patient Rights Violations in the Private Health Care Sector in India

2018 ◽  
pp. 1-19
Keyword(s):  
Health Care ◽  
Health Care Sector ◽  
Patient Rights ◽  
Medical Doctors ◽  
Private Health Care ◽  
Right To Health Care ◽  
Patients Rights ◽  
Regulatory Architecture ◽  
Health Care Policies ◽  
Admissible Evidence

Privatization oriented government health care policies have stimulated robust growth of private health care sector in India, without putting in place regulatory architecture that safeguards patients’ rights. The lack of adequate regulatory framework to govern them has put patients to undue disadvantage. This paper, based on primary investigation, analyses the ‘politics of evidence’ that patients are confronted with and are forced to navigate, in redressing ethical and patient rights violations against private medical establishments. The analysis of cases indicates that in the current medico-legal ecosystem is non-conducive to patients and impedes obtaining legally admissible evidence against medical professionals. The prevailing redressal avenues are significantly hostile to patients and unduly favour the private medical establishments who enjoy support and impunity from prosecution under the implicit state patronage. The paper makes a compelling case for a comprehensive regulatory architecture that simultaneously regulates the private medical establishments and safeguards the rights of patients.

scholarly journals BUKTI ELEKTRONIK SEBAGAI ALAT BUKTI YANG SAH DALAM HUKUM ACARA PIDANA / ELECTRONIC EVIDENCE AS AN ADMISSIBLE EVIDENCE IN CRIMINAL LAW

2017 ◽  
Vol 6 (3) ◽  
pp. 463
Author(s):  
NFN Ramiyanto
Keyword(s):  
Supreme Court ◽  
Criminal Procedure ◽  
Independent Evidence ◽  
Electronic Evidence ◽  
Procedure Code ◽  
Criminal Offenses ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
Criminal Procedure Law ◽  
Functional Equivalent ◽  
Admissible Evidence

KUHAP sebagai hukum acara pidana yang bersifat umum tidak mengakui bukti elektronik sebagai salah satu jenis alat bukti yang sah. Di dalam praktik, bukti elektronik juga digunakan sebagai alat bukti yang sah untuk membuktikan tindak pidana yang terjadi di pengadilan. Dari hasil pembahasan dapat disimpulkan, bahwa bukti elektronik dalam hukum acara pidana berstatus sebagai alat bukti yang berdiri sendiri dan alat bukti yang tidak berdiri sendiri (pengganti bukti surat apabila memenuhi prinsip/dasar dalam functional equivalent approach dan perluasan bukti petunjuk) sebagaimana dicantumkan dalam beberapa undang-undang khusus dan instrumen hukum yang dikeluarkan oleh Mahkamah Agung. Walaupun bukti elektronik tidak diatur dalam KUHAP sebagai lex generalis, namun untuk tercapainya kebenaran materiil dapat juga digunakan sebagai alat bukti yang sah untuk pembuktian seluruh jenis tindak pidana di pengadilan. Hal itu didasarkan pada pengakuan dalam praktik peradilan pidana, beberapa undang-undang khusus, dan instrumen yang dikeluarkan oleh Mahkamah Agung.The Criminal Procedure Code as a general criminal procedure does not recognize electronic evidence as one of the admissible types of evidence. In practice, electronic evidence is also used as an admissible evidence to prove the criminal offenses in court. From the results of the discussion it can be concluded that electronic evidence in criminal procedure law is a dependent evidence and an independent evidence (substitution of letter proof if it meets the principle of functional equivalent approach and expansion of evidence) as specified in several special laws and instruments issued by the Supreme Court. The electronic evidence is not regulated in the Criminal Procedure Code as a lex generalis, however, to achieve material truth it can also be used as a valid evidence for the provision of all types of criminal offenses in court. It is based on recognition in the practice of criminal justice, some special laws, and instruments issued by the Supreme Court.

The Features of Proving of the Property Transfer Fact under the Contract of Lease of a Buildings and Structures (Based on Judicial Practice Materials)

2021 ◽  
Vol 5 ◽  
pp. 29-37
Author(s):  
S. P. Balabanov ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Law Enforcement ◽  
Russian Federation ◽  
Effective Strategy ◽  
Judicial Practice ◽  
Property Transfer ◽  
The Russian Federation ◽  
Admissible Evidence

The article is devoted to the consideration of the problem of proving of the property transfer fact under the contract of lease of a buildings and structures, in the absence of an act of acceptance and transfer. The purpose of the article is to determine the most effective strategy for proving the property transfer fact under the contract of lease of a buildings and structures. Achieving this purpose requires determining the essential features of specified contract, as well as identifying and analyzing the approaches, that have been established in law enforcement practice, regarding to admissible means of proving the property transfer fact. In the course of the research, analyzes the materials of the judicial practice of the arbitration courts of the Russian Federation for disputes arising from the contract of lease of a buildings and structures. Based on the analysis, the author of the article substantiates the conclusion that the act of acceptance and transfer is not the only evidence confirming the property transfer fact and also forms an approximate list of admissible evidence that can be used in court for proving this fact.

Means of evidence and means of obtaining evidence

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Hans-Jürgen Ahrens
Keyword(s):  
The Law ◽  
Admissible Evidence

Rule 170 UPCARoP contains an indicative list of admissible means of evidence. It is much more extensive than the ZPO, which provides for five means of evidence under the law governing admissible evidence (Strengbeweisrecht). Unlike under the ZPO, the list has no significance for the fact that the rules on obtaining evidence are listed separately.

Do not be concerned by its appearance of complexity. It is a clear, manageable system of notation. The best understanding of this method can be obtained from briefly discussing it from three perspectives: 1 The original Wigmore Chart Method dating from 1913. 2 Anderson and Twining’s modification of the Wigmore Chart Method, from the mid-1980s. 3 Use of the modified method in this book as an aid for understanding argument construction. This will give a firm understanding of the discussions above through a practical demonstration. This discussion will then be followed by a practical demonstration of the modified Chart Method (changed slightly for our use) looking at the fictional criminal case of R v Mary. This is a demonstration devised to continue the development of argumentative skills already discussed in this chapter. A second case, R v Jack, is provided at the end of the chapter to allow students to try out their developing skills by analysing and charting a new case and building an argument. 7.10.1 The original Wigmore Chart Method John Wigmore wanted to restore an imbalance in the approach to evidence to be used in the trial. He first unveiled his views in an article published in the Illinois Law Review in 1913. He was concerned with issues surrounding the law of evidence. The law of evidence, as it is normally considered in university courses and in practice, is particularly concerned with the what type of evidence is admissible in court to prove the case of the parties. It is also concerned with the procedures that need to be followed to ensure that allowable evidence is not rendered inadmissible due to procedural and avoidable mistakes by those dealing with it before it reaches the court room. (This covers the field of forensic science as well as witness testimony.) Wigmore, however, believed that while the admissibility of evidence and the following of procedures are important aspects of the law relating to evidence, there was another more important area that had been completely ignored. This was the aspect of proof itself. What is the effect of the admissible evidence? How does it build to a finding of case proved for or against one party? Can it be said that there is a science of proof? Here of course issues relating to evidence and the construction of argument begin to merge. Wigmore sees proof in terms of the proving of points in argument persuading judges and juries of the outcome of a case. He argued:

2012 ◽  
pp. 240-240
Keyword(s):  
Forensic Science ◽  
Criminal Case ◽  
Witness Testimony ◽  
Modified Method ◽  
University Courses ◽  
The Law ◽  
Law Of Evidence ◽  
Admissible Evidence ◽  
Practical Demonstration

Part I The General Part, 2 Comparative and Theoretical Perspectives

2017 ◽  
Author(s):  
McMeel Gerard
Keyword(s):  
Theoretical Perspective ◽  
Relevant Literature ◽  
Civil Law ◽  
Contract Law ◽  
Future Developments ◽  
Theoretical Perspectives ◽  
Subjective Theory ◽  
Recent Developments ◽  
General Part ◽  
Admissible Evidence

This chapter first considers civil law jurisdictions and various international legal instruments and their approach to the construction of contracts. In particular, the chapter focuses on the objective/subjective debate and the admissible evidence. It then looks at the international restatements of contract law, which are committed to a subjective theory of contract, such as is found in civil law countries. Next, the chapter considers a more theoretical perspective in the topic of contractual interpretation, and introduces the relevant literature to that effect. Such wider perspectives have been a source of recent developments—and may continue to be the source of future developments—in this field.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document