What is the test for admitting evidence of discreditable conduct?
British Columbia, Canada
The following excerpt is from HMTQ v. Dupras, 2000 BCSC 1128 (CanLII):
The test whether to admit evidence of past discreditable conduct was succinctly set out by our Court of Appeal in Regina v. King (1998), 112 (B.C.C.A.) 247. The evidence must be: 1. relevant to an issue in the case; and 2. its probative value must exceed its prejudicial effect.
Evidence of an expression of malice, animosity or murderous intent on a previous occasion was clearly relevant to a charge of second-degree murder (Regina v. Truong (2000), (B.C.C.A.) 116). However, when weighing its probative value against its prejudicial effect, such evidence had to be placed in context.
"The most advanced legal research software ever built."
The above passage should not be considered legal advice. Reliable answers to complex legal questions require comprehensive research memos. To learn more visit www.alexi.com.
Other Questions
What is a fresh evidence when a father applies to admit evidence that he did not have at the time of trial? (British Columbia, Canada)
What is the test for admitting a breath sample as evidence in a sexual assault case? (British Columbia, Canada)
What is the standard of review for admitting fresh evidence in an appeal? (British Columbia, Canada)
What is the test for admitting or denying evidence that has been obtained in violation of the Charter of Civil Procedure? (British Columbia, Canada)
When is evidence of good character not admitted? (British Columbia, Canada)
What is the test for admitting new evidence in a criminal case? (British Columbia, Canada)
What is the legal test for admitting new evidence in a civil case? (British Columbia, Canada)
What is the test for a judge to determine whether or not the evidence was improperly admitted? (British Columbia, Canada)
Is a plaintiff required to lead expert evidence to overcome a no evidence motion? (British Columbia, Canada)
Does a no evidence motion where a real estate agent defendant argued that there was no expert evidence sufficient to establish a standard of care? (British Columbia, Canada)
