LSO Barrister Evidence Law

Question 1

What is the 'hearsay rule' in Canadian evidence law and what is its rationale?

Accepted Answer

An out-of-court statement tendered for the truth of its contents is presumptively inadmissible because it was not made under oath, the declarant was not subject to cross-examination, and the trier of fact could not observe demeanour

Answer

All out-of-court statements are automatically admissible

Answer

The hearsay rule only applies to written statements

Answer

Hearsay is always admissible if it is relevant

Question 2

What is the 'principled approach' to hearsay exceptions established in R v Khan and R v Khelawon?

Accepted Answer

Hearsay evidence may be admitted if the proponent demonstrates it is both 'necessary' (the declarant is unavailable or there is no adequate substitute) and 'reliable' (there is a sufficient basis for the trier of fact to assess its truth)

Answer

All hearsay is admissible if the judge considers it reliable

Answer

The principled approach abolished all traditional hearsay exceptions

Answer

The principled approach only applies to children's statements

Question 3

What is 'solicitor-client privilege' and how does it differ from 'litigation privilege' in Ontario?

Accepted Answer

Solicitor-client privilege protects confidential communications between lawyer and client for the purpose of seeking or giving legal advice (permanent), while litigation privilege protects documents and communications prepared for the dominant purpose of litigation (ends when litigation concludes)

Answer

They are the same privilege

Answer

Both privileges are permanent

Answer

Neither privilege can be claimed in Ontario courts

Question 4

What is the 'best evidence rule' and how has it evolved in Canadian law?

Accepted Answer

The original document (or a reliable copy) must be produced when the contents of a document are at issue, though the rule has been significantly relaxed by statute (e.g., the Canada Evidence Act allows copies) and modern case law

Answer

Only the best quality evidence is admissible

Answer

Only eyewitness testimony is admissible — documents are never acceptable

Answer

The rule requires experts to testify on all technical matters

Question 5

What is the test for the admissibility of 'similar fact evidence' in Canadian law?

Accepted Answer

Similar fact evidence is admissible when its probative value in relation to a specific issue outweighs its prejudicial effect, as established in R v Handy — the court must identify the specific issue, assess the connection, and weigh probative value against moral and reasoning prejudice

Answer

Similar fact evidence is always admissible

Answer

It is only admissible in sexual offence cases

Answer

Similar fact evidence is never admissible in Canada

Question 6

What is 'opinion evidence' and when are lay witnesses versus expert witnesses permitted to give opinion testimony?

Accepted Answer

Lay witnesses can give opinions on matters of common experience (e.g., speed, sobriety, age, identity, handwriting), while expert witnesses can give opinions on matters requiring specialized knowledge, subject to the Mohan criteria for admissibility

Answer

Only experts can ever give opinion evidence

Answer

Anyone can give opinion evidence on any topic

Answer

Opinion evidence is never admissible in Canadian courts