UK Hearsay admissability

Part 1 up to statutory inclusions

Quiz by

Rate:

Last updated: June 4, 2025

You have not attempted this quiz yet.

More quiz info >>

First submitted	June 4, 2025
Times taken	6
Average score	80.0%
Report this quiz	Report

Quiz and answer stats >>

Friends stats >>

7:00

The quiz is paused. You have remaining.

Copied!

Scoring

You scored / = %

This beats or equals % of test takers also scored 100%

The average score is

Your high score is

Your fastest time is

more stats >>

friends stats >>

Keep scrolling down for answers and more stats ...

1. What is Sir Rupert Cross's defintion of Hearsay ?

' a statement other than one made by a person giving oral evidence in the proceedings is admissable'

' A statement other than one made by a person giving oral evidence in the proceedings is inadmissable'

' A statement made by someone giving oral evidence in the proceedings is admissable'

'A statement made by someone giving oral evidence in the proceedings is inadmissable

2. What are the main compenants of the Roberts and Zuckerman definition of hearsay ?

out of court statements, used to prove relevant fact

In court statements, adduced for their truth

in court statement, used to prove relevant fact

out of court statements, adduced for their truth

3. Hearsay evidence is excluded unless ... ( Roberts and Zuckerman)

A well established exception to the exclusionary rule applies

inclusionary rule, hearsay evidence is not excluded

4. Which case held that evidence is relevant if it is logically probative

R v Horncastle

R v Twist

R v Sang

R v Kilbourne

5. hearsay evidence is defined s114(1) of the CJA 2003 as...

' a stament made in oral evidence'

' a statment made by a 3rd party out of court'

'a statement not made in oral evidence'

' a statement made during initial police interview'

6. What must the purpose of the statement be under s115(3)

to cause other person to be certain when giving evidence that what they have been told is true

to be held beyond reasonable doubt that it is true by jury

to cause other person to believe matter or to act on the basis the matter is as stated

has to be true

7. The 3 stage test was decided in the case of ...

r v chedwyn evans

r v twist

r v kilbourne

r v oliver

8. If all parties agree to admit the evidence under s114(1)(c) is it admissible

yes

9. which of the following factors is not a valid reason for a witness being unavailable under s116(1)

physically mentally unfit

dead

cannot be found/ outside the UK

unable to attend court due to work

10. What case held that if a witness refuses due to fear ( s116(2)(e) ) the fear does not need to be reasonable but must cause the refusal

R v McKidd

R v McCay

R v McCullen

R v Mcdonald

11. When considering if it can be admissible under s116(2)(e) courts must consider if it is necessary in the interests of justice considering ...

risk of faireness to parties of both admission and exclusion

whether special measures could be given under s19 YJCEA 1999 to allow oral evidence

all of these factors and all other relevant factors

statements contents

12. Which of the following is NOT part of the criteria in s117(2) for documentary evidence to be admissible if it would have been admissable in oral evidence

maker of documented statement had ( reasonably expected to have) personal experience of matter

all access to documented statement was done professionally

documented by professional in course of trade

be a first person account

13. Which case did w1 record D's reg number and leave in on the windscreen and w2 takes it to police but it was inadmissable because w1 didn't transmit to w2 in the course of business

Maher V Dpp

R v Andrews

R v twist

Ag ref No3 of 1998 v Dpp

14. When is a previous inconsistent statement admissable under S119(1):

w lies in statement and makes the same untrue staement at trial but proven untrue

when W accepts they made statements and proved the statement is contradicted by what they said at trial

where W doesn't make initial statement but evidence proves statement at trial is false

when W accepts they made a statement and statement is upheld at trial

15. When are other previous statements NOT admissable

to refresh W's memory during oral evidence

to rebut a suggestion that their oral evidence has been fabricated