Noticeboard
| Published date | 01 April 2018 |
| DOI | 10.1177/1365712718765195 |
| Date | 01 April 2018 |
| Author | Jeremy Gans |
| Subject Matter | Noticeboard |
Noticeboard
Jeremy Gans
University of Melbourne, Australia
Law reform and source material
Witnesses—Canada
Alberta Law Reform Institute, Competence and Communication in the Alberta Evidence Act, Final
Report 111, January 2018, available at <https://www.alri.ualberta.ca/images/stories/docs/FR111.pdf>
This report from Alberta’s peak law reform body recommends changes to witness competency rules
similar to reforms in other Canadian jurisdictions. Recommendations include: abolishing mandatory
competency hearings for child witnesses; permitting courts to direct ch ildren under 14 to make an
affirmation rather than an oath; abolishing the corroboration requirement for unsworn child evidence;
and permitting witnesses to communicate via their preferred form of communication (with no impact on
tests for competence.)
Jurors—United Kingdom
Scottish Courts and Tribunal Service, Enabling Jury Service, Report, February 2018, available at <http://
www.scotcourts.gov.uk/about-the-scottish-court-service/reports-data/enabling-jury-service/>
This report from Scotland’s court administration service responds to an incident where a blind juror
was initially compelled to participate in a jury panel and then excluded. The report makes a series of
recommendations that do not require legislative changes (including encouraging panellists to identify a
disability and installing electronic assistance) and two that do (permitting interpreters to attend in the
jury room; and empowering the judge to determine whether a juror with a disability can or cannot
participate in a jury.)
Rules of Evidence—United States
Advisory Committee on Evidence Rules, Report to the Standing Committee, November 2017, available
at <http://www.uscourts.gov/sites/default/files/2017-11-15-evidence_rules_committee_report_0.pdf>
This report from a body responsible for recommending changes to rules of the United States apex
court setting out the rules of evidence for federal courts summarises discussions on: a conference on the
admissibility of forensic evidence (foreshadowing a committee role ‘short of a rule change’); a potential
change to the ‘residual’ hearsay exception (focusing more on circumstantial guarantees of trustworthi-
ness and less on other factors); consideration of expanded substantive use of prior inconsistent state-
ments (rejecting blanket admissibility but considering admissibility of recorded statements);
Corresponding author:
Jeremy Gans, Melbourne Law School, University of Melbourne, 185 Pelham Street, Carlton, Melbourne, Victoria 3052, Australia.
E-mail: jeremy.gans@unimelb.edu.au
The International Journalof
Evidence & Proof
2018, Vol. 22(2) 185–186
ªThe Author(s) 2018
Reprints and permissions:
sagepub.co.uk/journalsPermissions.nav
DOI: 10.1177/1365712718765195
journals.sagepub.com/home/epj
To continue reading
Request your trial