Canadian Law of Evidence/Introduction
From Wikibooks, the open-content textbooks collection
Evidence in law are the rules that govern what can be presented to a trier of fact in a legal action when the opposing parties are in disagreement on facts of the case. This includese the use of testimony (eg. oral or written statements, such as an affidavit) and exhibits (eg. physical objects) or other documentary material which is admissible (ie. allowed to be considered by the trier of fact, such as jury) in a judicial or administrative proceeding (eg. a court of law).
[edit] Principles of evidence
The rules of evidence are guided by several principles. First and foremost, there is the need for accuracy in fact-finding, thus it is necessary to admit all relevent evidence. However, there is the countvailing issues. There is the need for finality, so that the case will eventually come to a satisfactory resolution. There is a need for efficiency, so that the trial won't take up too much time. There is a need for fairness, to preserve the process and give each side equal access to justice. This often entails protecting the fact finder from prejudicial evdience that will unfairly bias the fact finder.
The role of the judge is to maintain these principles through the application of admissibility rules.
[edit] Sources of evidence law
In Canada, the laws of evidence are primarily judge-made through common law rules, with some supporting statutes. The reason for this is to allow for the judges to excercise "principled flexibility" in order to keep the focus of the trial on the trier of fact rather than the tier of law.
Currently, the Supreme Court has been reforming the rules of evidence, and as such a large portion of the civil rules have been in flux.
