Mzumbe University Mbeya Campus College Department of Administrative Studies

MZUMBE UNIVERSITY
MBEYA CAMPUS COLLEGE
DEPARTMENT OF ADMINISTRATIVE STUDIES
PROGRAME: BACHELOR OF LAWS (LL.B II)
STUDENT NAME: VENOSSA P. LWAGA
REGISTRATION NO: 3130509/T.18
SUBJECT: LAW OF EVIDENCE
SUBJECT CODE: LAW 357
LECTURER NAME: DR. TASCO LUAMBANO
NATURE OF ASSIGNMENT: INDIVIDUAL ASSIGNMENT
SUBMISSION DATE: 8TH JULY, 2019
QUESTION;
INTRODUCTION
The court does not permit all information to be placed before it, it must be relevant, have
probative weight, be non-prejudicial and not subject to any rule of exclusion. If the
information possesses these characteristics, it is admissible evidence, often known as judicial
evidence.1
The expressions ‘relevancy’ and ‘admissibility’ are often taken to be synonymous but they
are not the same. Their legal implications are different. All admissible evidence is relevant
but all relevant evidence is not admissible. Relevancy is the genus of which admissibility is
the species.
Relevancy refers to the degree of connection and probable value between a fact that is given
in evidence and the issue to be proved. Relevancy of facts had been provided from Section 8
to 18 of the Evidence Act2. A relevant fact sometimes called “fact relevant to the issue” or
factum probans is a fact from which the existence or non-existence of a fact in issue may be
inferred. In simple words, relevancy determines whether one fact is related to another and a
fact is relevant to a case when it is related to the fact in issue.3
Admissibility involves the process whereby the court determines whether the law of
evidence permits that relevant evidence to be received by the court.
MAIN DISCUSSION
The following below are the grounds on how the concept of relevancy is a matter of fact and
admissibility is a matter of law;
Relevancy is a matter of fact on the ground that it is determined by logic and common
sense, practical or human experience and knowledge of affairs, this is due to the fact that
relevancy was defined by Lord Simon in the case of DPP vs. Kilbourne4 as follows
“Evidence is relevant if it is logically probative or disapprobative of some matter which
1
S. Uglow, (2006) Evidence Text and Materials, 2 nd Ed, Sweet & Maxwell, pg. 14
2
Cap 6 R.E 2006
3
B.T.Mapunda, EVIDENCE, pg 7
4
[1973] A.C 729
requires proof…evidence which makes the matter which requires proof more or less
probable.” This is provided for under section 3 (1) of the Tanzania Law of Evidence Act 5
which provides that a fact is relevant when the one is so connected with the other in any of
the ways referred to in the provisions of the Evidence Act relating to the relevancy of facts.
This means that a fact is only relevant if it is so linked to another in the way provided in the
Evidence Act..
By referring the illustration provided in section 3 (1) above for example where A is tried for
the murder of B by beating him with a club with the intention of causing his death. There are
three facts in issue to be proved- A’s beating B with the club; A’s causing B’s death by the
beating; and A’s intention to cause B’s death. A fact is relevant when it is so related to the
fact in issue, that they render the fact in issue probable or improbable. For example, to prove
the third facts in issue in the example just now, the facts that A and B was having quarrel
before the murder happen is relevant to prove the third facts in issue which is A’s intention to
cause B’s death.
Therefore relevancy is not primarily dependent on rules of law but is the relationship
between one fact and another wherein, according to the rules of logic and common
experience of men, the existence of the one renders probable the existence or non-existence
of the other. A fact which is not actually in issue but is in this relationship with a fact in issue
is a relevant fact. Relevance is not a legal concept, being rather one of logic and common
sense, but the law insists on its presence, by ruling that all relevant facts are admissible.6
Admissibility is a matter of law on the ground that a fact is admissible if the law allows it
to be proved by evidence. It is only allowed to be proved if it is either in issue or has some
degree of relevance to the facts in issue.7
Admissibility of evidence also refers to a state of thing being allowed or accepted. It refers
to whether a piece of evidence is permitted to be given before the court.8
5
CAP 6 R.E 2002
6
Phipson & Elliot, (1980) Manual of the Law of Evidence, Sweet & Maxwell, pg. 10
7
V.P.Sarathi, (2013) Law of Evidence, 6th Ed, Eastern Book Company, pg 11
8
Phipson & Elliot, Op Cit, pg 13
The general rule on the relevance and admissibility of evidence is provided for under
Section 7 of the Tanzania Law of Evidence Act 9 that; all admissible evidence are relevant,
but not all relevant evidences are admissible.
A fact can be relevant only logically, for instance previous conviction or a fact can be
relevant logically and legally when it is so connected with the fact in issue as to form part of
the same transaction and it is one so declared by any of the provisions of the Tanzania
Evidence Act.10To be admissible therefore, a fact must be logically and legally relevant.
Wigmore on Evidence11 gives two important propositions with regard to this fundamental
principle of evidence when he says none but facts having rational probative value are
admissible and all facts having rational probative value are admissible, unless some specific
rule forbids.
The general rule on evidence however, does not mean that all relevant facts are admissible as
there are many rules of the Law of Evidence excluding evidence of relevant facts on some
ground or other. There are also different circumstances in which relevant facts may not be
admissible.
Therefore, relevancy and admissibility of evidence can be distinguished that relevancy

determines what fact is related to another and what is not, that is, relevant and irrelevant
facts. Admissibility on the other hand, deals with what is allowed and what is not after the
former has been sorted out. In the case of Ram Bihari Yadar vs. State of Bihar12 the
Supreme Court explained a point of difference between relevance of evidence and its
admissibility that relevancy and admissibility have different legal implications because facts
which are relevant may not be admissible. Relevancy and admissibility are therefore, not
synonymous and they cannot be used interchangeably. Field makes a point when he says:-
“It is safer….to use the term relevant as meaning logically probative and admissible as
meaning legally receivable.”
9
CAP 6 R.E 2002
10
CAP 6 R.E 2002
11
Pg 25
12
[1994] 4 SCC 517
The same position was stated by Lord Simon of Glaisdale in the case of DPP vs. Kilbourne13
when he said: - “Although relevance and admissibility are often used interchangeably, it
makes for clarity if they are kept separate.”
Part I of the Tanzania Law of Evidence Act 14, Section 8-18 provides for facts which are
relevant. Also, within these Sections there are different conditions for these facts to be
admissible. If these conditions are not fulfilled, facts no matter how relevant they may be,
cannot be admissible.
CONCLUSION
Generally, relevancy is a test for admissibility. The question of admissibility is one of law
and is determined by the Court. If it can be shown that the evidence would be relevant if
proved, the court shall admit evidence of it.
REFERENCES
STATUTE
The Evidence Act [Cap 6 R.E 2002]

13
[1973] AC 729
14
CAP 16 R.E 2002
BOOKS
Phipson & Elliot, (1980) Manual of the Law of Evidence, Sweet & Maxwell, UK
S. Uglow, (2006) Evidence Text and Materials, 2nd Ed, Sweet & Maxwell, UK
V.P.Sarathi, (2013) Law of Evidence, 6th Ed, Eastern Book Company, India
CASE LAWS
DPP vs. Kilbourne [1973] AC 729
Ram Bihari Yadar vs. State Of Bihar [1994] 4 SCC 517

Mzumbe University Mbeya Campus College Department of Administrative Studies

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Mzumbe University Mbeya Campus College Department of Administrative Studies

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Mzumbe University Mbeya Campus College Department of Administrative Studies

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

MZUMBE UNIVERSITY

MBEYA CAMPUS COLLEGE

DEPARTMENT OF ADMINISTRATIVE STUDIES

PROGRAME: BACHELOR OF LAWS (LL.B II)

STUDENT NAME: VENOSSA P. LWAGA

REGISTRATION NO: 3130509/T.18

SUBJECT: LAW OF EVIDENCE

SUBJECT CODE: LAW 357

LECTURER NAME: DR. TASCO LUAMBANO

NATURE OF ASSIGNMENT: INDIVIDUAL ASSIGNMENT

SUBMISSION DATE: 8TH JULY, 2019

Therefore, relevancy and admissibility of evidence can be distinguished that relevancy

The Evidence Act [Cap 6 R.E 2002]

DPP vs. Kilbourne [1973] AC 729

Ram Bihari Yadar vs. State Of Bihar [1994] 4 SCC 517

You might also like