evidence law
According to the Evidence Act Cap 6, evidence denotes the means by which any alleged matter or facts the truth of which is submitted to investigations, approved or disapproved, admissions, presumption of law and observations by courts in the judicial capacity as per section 2[1]d of the act.
Rules of evidence refer to the procedure of admitting relevant facts by courts of law and in general they are referred to as Relevancy and Admissibility of Evidence According to section 4, it may be given from any suit or proceedings of the existence or non existence of every fact in issue and of such other facts as may be declared admissible and relevant as was considered in the case of Uganda v David Kamugisha1, where an application was made by the defense counsel to tender in a letter purportedly written by a witness. The witness however denied knowing how to read and write or even being a girl friend to the accused. The issue was whether this letter was admissible in evidence. It was held that admissibility of any piece of evidence depends on whether it was relevant to the fact in issue before court and whether it was in line with the fact in issue.
Another case of Struggle Uganda Limited v Pan African Insurance Company Limited2 , where plaintiff gave evidence and before it that the defendant company did not exist of which the defendants objected on grounds that it was not in line with the case before court. The issue was whether the company owned the suit premises or not. It was held that the existence of the company was not the fact in issue as it was not pleaded for in the plaint.
It is also argued that once the evidence is admissible its manner of obtaining it does not matter. In the case of Kirume v R3 , where a police officer went to accused’s premises to mount a search without warrant, and discovered some incriminating items which the prosecution sought to tender in it and accused objected to it arguing that it was obtained illegally. Privy Council held that the
Rules of evidence refer to the procedure of admitting relevant facts by courts of law and in general they are referred to as Relevancy and Admissibility of Evidence According to section 4, it may be given from any suit or proceedings of the existence or non existence of every fact in issue and of such other facts as may be declared admissible and relevant as was considered in the case of Uganda v David Kamugisha1, where an application was made by the defense counsel to tender in a letter purportedly written by a witness. The witness however denied knowing how to read and write or even being a girl friend to the accused. The issue was whether this letter was admissible in evidence. It was held that admissibility of any piece of evidence depends on whether it was relevant to the fact in issue before court and whether it was in line with the fact in issue.
Another case of Struggle Uganda Limited v Pan African Insurance Company Limited2 , where plaintiff gave evidence and before it that the defendant company did not exist of which the defendants objected on grounds that it was not in line with the case before court. The issue was whether the company owned the suit premises or not. It was held that the existence of the company was not the fact in issue as it was not pleaded for in the plaint.
It is also argued that once the evidence is admissible its manner of obtaining it does not matter. In the case of Kirume v R3 , where a police officer went to accused’s premises to mount a search without warrant, and discovered some incriminating items which the prosecution sought to tender in it and accused objected to it arguing that it was obtained illegally. Privy Council held that the