Coursework Assigment (Coursework Sample)

Coursework Assignment for Procedure and Proof
Institution’s Name:
Candidate’s Name:
Problem one:
1 What is meant by the term ‘evidence?’ When is evidence admissible?
Evidence in a suit is that matter of fact in the suit before the court that the litigants seek to prove or disapprove in a case by use of (testimonies, documents and tangible objects). All evidence in support or disapproval of a matter in issue is admissible in the courts. Evidence that is brought to court with no probative value is disregarded as it is deemed a mere fishing expedition by the producing party of such evidence.
2. On the facts stated above, in order to prove the case, the prosecutor would need to rely on various types of evidence. Please group all the evidence available to the prosecutor into the three categories (or types) of ‘judicial evidence.’
a. Real evidence. This is the kind of evidence that is derived from the presence of there being a physical object, and that object is assumed to be the one used in performing a criminal act. In this case the blood stained chopper and also the blood stained gloves found at the house of A, are forms of real evidence.
b. Circumstantial evidence.
Circumstantial evidence is obtained by making inferences, personal knowledge and observation, are not involved in circumstantial evidence. The circumstantial evidence, in this case, is:
1. A was seen walking out of an apartment that Alice lived just before midnight on 10th June whereas, Alice was discovered dead on 11th June in the Morning at 7.00 am.
2. Alice was A’s former girlfriend.
3. Mr Chan, a waiter at a restaurant in Mongkok, had seen A and Alice arguing.
4. Where was A between 10.30pm of 10th June and 10.00am of 11th June? A contradicts himself by saying that he was at Mr LI’s house until 1.00 am on 11th June when he had left earlier.
5. A bought a chopper similar to that found at the crime scene from Mr Liu in early June.
6. A was identified as wearing gloves in summer; the question is why?
7. Upon examination of the gloves allegedly used in the commission of the crime, the blood on them was of the same blood group as that of Alice.
c. Hearsay evidence.
Hearsay evidence is that which a witness gives in court not on what he/she personally knows, but on what he/she heard other people say. Hence, this type of evidence is dependent on the credibility of the individual who made such averments for the declaration to be admissible in court. Hearsay evidence, in this case:
1. Mr Chan, a waiter at a restaurant in Mongkok, had seen A and Alice arguing, and he heard A saying to Alice, "if you don’t stay away from him, I will kill you.”
3. What is meant by the term ‘direct evidence’? Is there any direct evidence that A murdered Alice? If so, indicate which evidence. This is evidence that is based on personal knowledge or observation and that, if true it proves a fact without inference or presumption.
4. What is meant by the term ‘circumstantial evidence’? What evidence here would be ‘circumstantial evidence’? Circumstantial evidence is obtained by making inferences, personal knowledge and observation, are not involved in circumstantial evidence.
Problem two:
1 What steps can Peter’s counsel take, to make the photocopies admissible?
The act of the employer of deciding what to compensate Peter, without consultation with Peter, amounts to arbitrariness on the side of the employer. The rules of natural justice dictate that Peter should have been involved in reaching the compensation amount for the whole act to be considered fair (Cameron, 2009). The arbitrator should be made to understand that however much the employer has decided to give to Peter, it is not enough. The medical receipts should be looked at, through that a fair compensation can be reached. The employer avers that, Peter had contributed to his injuries by not looking where he was going. The arbitrator should be made to understand that, the workplace had been disorganised by the act of the employer who left discarded pieces of metal pipe and other rubbish. Had the passageway been in its ordinary and expected condition, Peter would not have suffered any loss.
2 Assuming the employer’s counsel maintains his objection, what courses of action are available to the Arbitrator regarding the objection and this piece of evidence?
In all fairness, the arbitrator will convince Peter to take the sum offered by the employer to him. The continued blocking of Peter not to produce medical receipts is an attempt by the employer not to compensate Peter what is due to him. The arbitrator will play the role of quelling Peter and his employer; otherwise that is what arbitrators are for since they don’t advocate lawsuits in a court of justice (Cameron, 2009).
At the conclusion of the hearing, Peter is awarded damages of $1.8 million, to be paid within two months. Both parties apply for the costs of the arbitration.
3 Which party is likely to be awarded their costs and from when? Why?
The arbitrator chosen in helping solve the dispute between Peter and his employer will award the company costs for the suit. The company offered Peter a deal of $2 million before Peter sought the aid of an arbitrator who has only made matters worse by awarding Peter $0.2 million less what the company offered. From the facts above it is unlikely that Peter will be awarded costs for the suit (Cameron, 2009). The disregard of the medical receipt as exhibits produced by Peter, no justice will come his way by the same arbitrator.
4 In the event of the employer not paying Peter the amount of the award within two months, what action can Peter take to enforce the payment of the award?
The employer had consented to pay Peter after two months, and when the employer fails, Peter has no choice but to seek the indulgence of the court to compel the employer to pay the agreed liquidated damages.
Problem 3:
1 What is meant by the term hearsay?
This is what a person reports having heard someone say. This is not dependent on what he/she personally knows but what he/she heard other people say. This type of evidence is dependent on the credibility of the individual who made such statement for it to be admissible.
2 The statement made by the deceased just before he died is hearsay. Is it admissible in evidence against C at his trial? Please give reason or reasons for your answer.
Evidence of a statement made to a witness by a person who cannot be called as a witness or is deceased then may or may not be hearsay. Such a declaration is hearsay and inadmissible when the core object of the declaration is tied to the establishment of the truthfulness of a declaration. On the other hand, such statement is not hearsay and is admissible when it is invoked purposely for the reasoning of affirming that it was made. Dying declarations, like the one made by the deceased, are often admissible. It is assumed that; a dying man cannot tell a lie when he actually believed, when he was making such statement, that his life was coming to an end, or he was face to face with his impending death.
3 The statement made by Madam le is hearsay. Is it admissible against C at his trial? Please give reasons for your answer.
The statement by Madam le is admissible in evidence so far as it tends to prove that the statement was made by C’s brother. The statement of Madam Le helps in the building of circumstantial evidence in finding C culpable of the murder of Mr Vanh.
4 The statement by C to the police is hearsay. Is it admissible against C at his trial? Please give reasons for your answer.
The statement made by C are admissible in evidence since the police cautioned him of the statements he was going to make that they could be used against him in a court of law. The police upon arrest of C procured the services of an interpreter to help C understand what the police needed from him. The defence of a language barrier can’t be brought up by C since he was afforded the services of an interpreter of which he made use of by claiming responsibility.
Problem 4:
1 Describe the pleadings you would expect in the case, indicating the nature of the process to be issued, the manner in which it would be issued and how it may be served. You can assume that all parties are resident in Hong Kong and should anticipate that the Best Printing Co. Ever Ltd will issue a third party notice in respect of First Rate Engineering Co. Ltd.
Jimmy’s father will sue in a representative capacity as the next friend of Jimmy (Fisher, 2009). Before a writ to the effect of Jimmy’s dad suing in a representative capacity is issued, the writ must be endorsed. Since Jimmy’s father is suing through a solicitor, endorsement of the solicitor is necessary. The name of the solicitor or firm that he/she acts for should be provided, and the counsel should give an address of within the court’s jurisdiction.
A writ for service within the jurisdiction may be issued as a concurrent writ with one that is to be served out of the jurisdiction, and a writ that is to be served out of court's jurisdiction may be issued as a concurrent writ with one for service within the jurisdiction (Fisher, 2009). In this case, all parties to the suit are residents of Hong Kong thus a concurrent writ will suffice. Jimmy’s father is expected to plead child labour on his son by The Best Printing Co. Ever Ltd. Jimmy was still under age to venture into casual employment by the company involved. The company should not have taken advantage of an innocent, gullible boy who was only after money. Although Jimmy was just an underage employee who had no formal engageme...