| Makin v Attorney General for New South Wales | |
|---|---|
.svg) | |
| Court | Judicial Committee of the Privy Council |
| Full case name | (1) John Makin, and (2) Sarah Makin v Attorney General for New South Wales |
| Decided |
|
| Citations | [1893] UKPC 56, [1894] AC 57 |
| Case history | |
| Prior actions | R v Makin [1893] NSWLawRp 28, (1893) 14 LR (NSW) 1 |
| Appealed from | Supreme Court (Full Court) |
| Court membership | |
| Judges sitting | Lord Herschell LC, Lord Watson, Lord Halsbury, Lord Ashbourne, Lord Macnaghten, Lord Morris, Lord Shand |
| Case opinions | |
| Decision by | Lord Herschell LC |
| Keywords | |
| similar fact evidence | |
Makin v Attorney General for New South Wales[1] is a significant 1893 decision of the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council which gave rise to the modern common law rule of similar fact evidence.[2][3]
- ^ Makin v Attorney General for New South Wales [1893] UKPC 56, [1894] AC 57 (12 December 1893), Privy Council (on appeal from NSW).
- ^ Malek Hodge (2010). Phipson on Evidence (17th ed.). Sweet & Maxwell. 19-17.
- ^ Ian Dennis (2007). The Law of Evidence (3rd ed.). Sweet & Maxwell. 18.21.
© MMXXIII Rich X Search. We shall prevail. All rights reserved. Rich X Search