RELEVANCY,

ADMISSIBILITY AND
WEIGHT
CONDITIONS FOR FACTS BEFORE COUNTS AS EVIDENCE IN
LAW?
Prepared by:
NURAFIQAH BINTI MD YUSOF 1411778
TUTORIAL THURSDAY 4-5 PM
 INTRODUCTION

In the law governing documentary evidence, as in

oral evidence, three matters come to mind
Relevancy
Admissibility
Weight
-Desa Samudra Sdn Bhd V Bandar Teknik Sdn Bhd
[2012] 1 MLJ 729
 Relevancy
In A Digest of the Law of Evidence by Sir James Fitzjames
Stephen, relevant can be defined as:
Any two factsso related to each other that according
to the common course of events one either taken by itself or
in connection with other facts proves and renders probable
the past, present and future existence or non-existence of
the other

Relevant Facts:
- facts so connected with each other as to prove or
disprove the facts in issue. It was listed in Chapter II of the
Act. Thus as it is stipulated by law, the relevancy of facts refer
to legal relevancy instead of logical relevancy.
 Section 3 of the Evidence Act defines relevant as:
One fact is said to be relevant to another when the
one is connected with the other in any of the ways referred
to in the provisions of this Act relating to the relevancy of
facts

Probative value:
having the quality of
function/proving/demonstrating something OR affording
proof/evidence
- When the probative value outweight prejudicial effect,
the court will admit the facts.

Section 5 to be read together with Section 136 (1)

 Admissibility

It is a process whereby the court determines whether

the Law of Evidence permits that relevant evidence
to be received by the court.
Evidence is admissible if it may be lawfully adduced
at a trial(Kilbourne)
The general rule is: all relevant evidence is prima
facie admissible
However, a relevant evidence does not necessarily
admissible.
 Lawton LJ in R v Turner:
Relevance however does not result in evidence being
admissible; it is a condition precedent to admissibility. Our
law excludes evidence of many matters which in life outside
the court sensible people take into consideration when
making decision. Two broad heads of exclusion are hearsay
and opinion.
The admissibility depends on:
1)concept of relevancy of a sufficiently high degree
2)the evidence does not infringe any of the exclusionary
rules that may be applicable on it example Section 24
 Weight

When:
1. Whether the facts achieve the standard of proof
2. Whether there is prima facie in this case
3. Totality of evidence siding prosecution or accused
side
Degree of probability (both intrinsically and
inferentially) which is attached to the evidence by the
tribunal of fact once it is established to be relevant
and admissible in law.
 The time honoured principle is that evidence has to
be weighed and not counted (Kunju @
Balachandran v State of Tamil Nadu)
Example: Section 134 EA
Section 3 EA: proved disproved not proved
 If the evidence is NOT RELEVANT, no need to
consider the other two characteristics

Relevancy Admissibility
- Question of law - Question of law Weight
- Element of probative - Fulfill Relevancy -Question of fact
value condition and not -Degree of probative
- Fulfill provision infringe exclusionary value
under S 5-55 clause

If the evidence is RELEVANT, If the evidence is RELEVANT

proceed to discuss
admissibility
*Hence, not necessarily a
relevant evidence will be
admissible
AND ADMISSIBLE, the court will
attached a weight on the said
evidence
 Public Prosecutor v Haji Kassim
[1971] 2 MLJ 115
In all our courts the Evidence Ordinance provides a complete
code on the subject. If any fact is sought to be introduced in
evidence it must be relevant and admissible under section 5
or one of the other sections following.
On the other hand, whatever is logically probative is not
necessarily admissible in evidence, unless it is so under the
Ordinance.
Therefore (in admissibility), must be sought within the four
walls of the Evidence Ordinance. If any fact is admissible
under our code, then it must be receivable unless it is
excluded by some other provision therein as, for instance,
sections 24 to 26.
Thavanathan Subramaniam v PP
[1997] 3 CLJ 150

Of the law of evidence, the cardinal rule relating to

relevancy is that, subject to the exclusionary rules, all
evidence which is sufficiently relevant to the facts in
issue is admissible.
Sris Chandra Nandy v Rakhalananda

Once a statute is passed which purports to contain the

whole law it is imperative. It is not open to any Judge to
exercise a dispensing power, and admit evidence not
admissible by the statute because to him it appears that
the irregular evidence would throw light upon the issue.
 On appeal from REGINA. v. KILBOURNE

Lord Simon: four concepts in the law of evidence: (i) relevance;

(ii) admissibility; (iii) corroboration; (iv) weight.
The first two terms used interchangeably they are kept
separate, since some relevant evidence is inadmissible and
some admissible evidence is irrelevant.
Evidence is relevant if it is logically probative or disprobative
of some matter which requires proof.
Evidence is admissible if it may be lawfully adduced at a trial.
"Weight" of evidence is the degree of probability (both
intrinsically and inferentially) which is attached to it by the
tribunal of fact once it is established to be relevant and
admissible in law
PUBLIC PROSECUTOR v DATO' SERI
ANWAR BIN IBRAHIM (NO 3)

Questions of admissibility of evidence are questions of

law and are determinable by the judge to admit all
relevant evidence, it is no less his duty to exclude all
irrelevant evident.
Section 5 entitled party of proceeding to give evidence
of relevant facts under the provisions of Evidence Act
1950.
The judge is empowered to allow such evidence that in
his opinion is relevant and admissible.
 However, the judge also has been endowed with the
power to exclude evidence which it consider
irrelevant even before a proposed witness begin to
give evidence.
Law of Evidence by Monir:
This section (section 136(1)). Gives to the court
the power to ask a party tendering evidence of a
particular fact to show how the fact if proved would be
relevant, and the evidence can be admitted only if the
court is satisfied that it is relevant
Muthusamy v Public Prosecutor

It is the duty of the advocate to prepare his case with

due regard to the real issues and with special care for
the law of evidence. If he cannot shew tersely that a
proposed question is relevant he cannot complain if
the Magistrate promptly excludes it under section 5
which provides that evidence may be given of legally
relevant facts 'and of no others'.
 QUESTION BY THE STUDENT
What is your opinion regarding codified exclusionary and
inclusionary clause in the Evidence Act?
Answer: It offers higher sufficient degree of relevancy since it
was provided in the Statute.
Also, it is the intention of the drafter to avoid problem in
determining what facts is relevant and admissible in law, and
not merely based on logical thinking.
Whatever is logical relevant not necessarily legally relevant.
However, whatever is legally relevant is surely logical
relevant.
Although some facts is relevant according to common law
and not been stipulated in the statute, however it is the duty
of the judges to make decision according to the Statute.