Admissibility of Similar Fact Evidence: It was incorrect that similar fact evidence was only admissible in a civil case if it was likely to be reasonably conclusive of a primary issue in the proceedings or, alternatively, if it had enhanced relevance so as to have substantial probative value. The correct test was whether the evidence was potentially probative in the proceedings.
|
Fresh evidence which related to the question of whether the respondent had lied at trial and deliberately inflated his claim for loss of earnings was an insufficient basis for an appeal against the trial judge’s conclusive finding against the appellant for assault and battery. Even if the appellant had been able to demonstrate to the requisite standard of proof that the respondent had deliberately inflated his claim, it would not have been right to set aside the entire judgment. As far as liabil ...
|
| 1 |