Civil Bill

Grandeeod

Quick one for you guys.

What happens if an exhibit contained within a sworn affidavit is actually unrelated to the particular case?

Is it adjourned or struck out?

Pat Mustard

Not enough information to give a definitive answer, really.

It may be difficult to give details of a specific case without turning this into a request for legal advice, tbh.

Grandeeod

Pat Mustard wrote: »

Not enough information to give a definitive answer, really.

It may be difficult to give details of a specific case without turning this into a request for legal advice, tbh.

Apologies. Not seeking legal advice. I got into an argument last night with one of those land league people who claimed that the legal profession are breaking rules and getting undefended repossesion orders even when exhibits in Grounding affidavits are wrong/unrelated. I've just started a law course, so was a bit shocked. May have to ask in class next week.

hullaballoo

You may as well have been discussing angling techniques with a fish, tbh.

Pat Mustard

Grandeeod wrote: »

Apologies. Not seeking legal advice. I got into an argument last night with one of those land league people who claimed that the legal profession are breaking rules and getting undefended repossesion orders even when exhibits in Grounding affidavits are wrong/unrelated. I've just started a law course, so was a bit shocked. May have to ask in class next week.

Those guys don't have a clue what they are talking about. If they could succeed on the basis of their points in court then that's what they would do. They are only making excuses as to why their hocus pocus doesn't work.

Peregrinus

If you introduce evidence in court proceedings which is not relevant to the point at issue, it has no effect at all.

This happens all the time when evidence is given orally - witnesses mention details which have no bearing on the points in dispute. For example, a witness to a traffic accident might explain that they were on the particular road where the accident happened at that particular time because they were on there way home from picking the kids up at school. It's most unlikely that that particular detail will have any bearing at all on who is responsible for the accident, but their mentioning it is not a problem.

Same goes, in theory, for evidence submitted by affidavit. If somebody submits evidence which is not relevant, it has no impact.

Of course, in the real world, whoever drew up the affidavit thinks it is relevant, and he may be correct. A land league type in a pub may not be the soundest authority on the question of what is, and what is not, relevant in repossession proceedings.