Critical Perspectives on the Uniform Evidence Law

Critical Perspectives on the Uniform Evidence Law comprises a collection of writing by the leading academics and practitioners in the field. It provides sustained critical analysis of a range of issues, including the implications of adoption of the legislation in overseas jurisdictions and the obstacles to enactment in the ‘hold-out’ States of South Australia, Queensland and Western Australia. The contributions explore the UEL’s relationship with the common law and provide critical analysis of the operation of the law in relation to: assessment of probative value; tendency and coincidence reasoning; the admissibility of complaint evidence in sexual offence trials; judicial warnings in respect of unreliable evidence; establishing the expertise of those providing expert opinion evidence; admissions and confessions; and identification evidence. The book also provides comparative analysis of the UEL’s credibility provisions and its approach to the admissibility of improperly obtained evidence.

Introduction Andrew Roberts and Jeremy Gans 1. The Uniform Evidence Law in the Islands Jeremy Gans 2. Adoption of the Uniform Evidence Legislation: So Far and No Further? Andrew Hemming 3. Uniform Evidence Law and the Common Law Stephen Odgers 4. Probative Value, Reliability, and Rationality Andrew Roberts 5. Knowing Experts? Section 79, Forensic Science Evidence and the Limits of ‘Training, Study or Experience’ Gary Edmond and Kristy A Martire 6. The Application of the Uniform Evidence Law to Delay in Child Sexual Assault Trials Annie Cossins and Jane Goodman-Delahunty 7. The Admissibility of Complaint Evidence: Focusing on Time is a Waste of Time Miiko Kumar 8. Judicial Warnings About Unreliable Evidence: Why, When and How? John Anderson 9. ‘Tendency Evidence’ and ‘Coincidence Evidence’ in the Criminal Trial: What’s the Difference? David Hamer 10. Confessions and Admissions Under the UEL Mark Weinberg 11. Updating Beliefs: Rethinking the Regulation of Identification Evidence Under the UEL Mehera San Roque 12. A Question of ‘Desirability’: Balancing and Improperly Obtained Evidence in Comparative Perspective Andrew L-T Choo 13. Assessing a Person’s Truthfulness on Either Side of the Tasman: Comparing Concepts of Credibility and Veracity Elisabeth McDonald

Andrew Roberts is an Associate Professor at Melbourne Law School, The University of Melbourne. Jeremy Gans is a Professor at Melbourne Law School, The University of Melbourne.