Law of Evidence study materials
Law of Evidence study resources

Law of Evidence study guide

Law of Evidence · Work through your exam, one topic at a time.

The Law of Evidence exam is an independent, practice-focused assessment for candidates who need to understand how facts are proved in adversarial proceedings. It suits CILEX-style learners, paralegals, legal apprentices, litigation support staff and anyone preparing for advocacy-adjacent work where evidential rulings decide outcomes. The Law of Evidence study guide has 6 sections and about 2,602 words.

01

Relevance and Admissibility of Evidence

This domain tests the logical and legal gates through which evidence must pass. Relevance asks whether the material tends to make a fact in issue more or less probable.

352 words, about 2 min
02

Burden and Standard of Proof

This domain tests who must prove what, to what level, and what happens when a burden is not discharged. Criminal and civil proceedings use different starting points, but both distinguish the legal burden from the evidential burden.

378 words, about 2 min
03

Witnesses: Competence, Compellability and Examination

This domain tests who may give evidence, who can be forced to do so, and how testimony is elicited and tested. Competence concerns capacity to give evidence; compellability concerns liability to be compelled.

351 words, about 2 min
04

Hearsay and the Exceptions

This domain tests statements made outside court that are offered to prove the truth of their contents. Hearsay is generally inadmissible because the maker cannot be cross-examined and the tribunal cannot observe demeanour.

362 words, about 2 min
05

Confessions

This domain tests admissions of guilt and the reliability safeguards around them. A confession is any statement, wholly or partly adverse to its maker, whether to a police officer, a private person or in writing.

381 words, about 2 min
06

Improperly Obtained Evidence and Exclusion

This domain tests whether evidence obtained by illegality, breach of procedure or unfairness may still be used. The starting point is that relevance governs admissibility; impropriety does not automatically exclude.

778 words, about 4 min