Same-transaction relevancy admits connected acts, statements, correspondence and sequential deliveries despite differing times or places. Section 6 establishes the same-transaction rule of relevancy: facts not independently in issue are relevant when sufficiently connected with a fact in ... Summary
Cases where this provision is explicitly mentioned in the judgment/order text; may not be exhaustive. To view the complete list of cases mentioning this section, Click here.
Same-transaction relevancy admits connected acts, statements, correspondence and sequential deliveries despite differing times or places.
Section 6 establishes the same-transaction rule of relevancy: facts not independently in issue are relevant when sufficiently connected with a fact in issue to constitute part of one transaction. Connection may exist despite differences in time or place. The rule covers contemporaneous or closely connected words and conduct, events within a wider occurrence, related correspondence, and successive deliveries through intermediaries, where each fact bears a factual connection to the transaction under inquiry.
Full Summary is available for active users!
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.