Code
Oral admissions as to the contents of a document are not relevant, unless and
until the party proposing to prove them shows that he is entitled to give secondary evidence
of the contents of such document under the rules hereinafter contained, or unless the
genuineness of a document produced is in question.
Explanation
This section restricts the use of oral admissions when it comes to proving the content of documents. The rationale is to preserve the integrity of documentary evidence and ensure accuracy.
Oral statements (admissions) about what a document contains are generally not accepted as evidence unless:
- The party is legally allowed to present secondary evidence (for instance, if the original document is lost or destroyed), or
- The authenticity or genuineness of the document is being questioned in court.
This is meant to avoid disputes or errors over what a document actually said, especially when the original is available.
Illustration
Suppose a person, during a trial, claims they had a written agreement with someone and makes oral statements about what was in that agreement.
- These oral statements are not relevant or admissible in court unless:
- The person proves the original agreement is lost or inaccessible (secondary evidence is allowed), or
- The case is about whether the agreement is fake or forged (questioning genuineness).
Key Concepts
- Oral admissions ≠ Proof of content — unless backed by secondary evidence rules.
- Documentary evidence is preferred and prioritized.
- Exception: Genuineness of document under challenge.
