FOR2609 ASSIGNMENT 2 2026
DUE JULY 2026
Question 1 During Mr Matlala’s motor vehicle accident trial, the prosecution
intends to call a police reserve officer, Mr Sibiya, to testify as an expert witness
about whether Mr Matlala was drunk at the time of the accident. Mr Sibiya was not
at the accident scene and did not test Mr Matlala’s blood for alcohol content.
However, Mr Sibiya has many years of experience as a police reserve officer and
has attended numerous car accidents where drivers were found to be intoxicated
Mr Sibiya knows Mr Matlala personally, as a tavern owner, and they previously
had an altercation. Mr Mkhwanazi, an honest and seasoned police officer, saw the
accident when it happened; however, he was not requested to provide a
statement.
QUESTION 2.1: Explain the relationship between proof and the law of evidence
The law of evidence and proof are intrinsically linked in that the law of evidence
provides the procedural framework through which proof is established in court. Proof is
the objective, defined as "grounds for a ruling in terms of a fact in dispute" where "a fact
is proven when there are sufficient grounds for the presiding officer to accept the
existence of such fact" (FOR2609 Prescribed Book, Ch 16, p. 405).
The law of evidence, as "the entire body of legal rules that regulate the proof of facts in
a court of law" (FOR2609 Prescribed Book, Ch 16, p. 403), determines which evidence
may be submitted, how it should be submitted, and who may present it. Also, the law of
evidence sets the standard of proof in criminal cases, requiring the state to prove all
facts "beyond reasonable doubt" (FOR2609 Prescribed Book, Ch 16, p. 405). It also
governs the admissibility of evidence and allocates the burden of proof, with "the party
, who makes an allegation must prove that allegation" (FOR2609 Prescribed Book, Ch
16, p. 405). Thus, the law of evidence is the vehicle through which proof is furnished to
the court.
QUESTION 2.2: Discuss the requirements for a person to be allowed to testify in
court as an expert witness
For a person to testify as an expert witness, they must first demonstrate competence
based on specialist knowledge, training, skill, or experience, and must be able to assist
the court in deciding the issues on account of these attributes (FOR2609 Prescribed
Book, Ch 19, pp. 447-448). Formal qualifications are not always essential, as "practical
experience of the witness may often be decisive" and people with only practical
experience can also qualify as experts (FOR2609 Prescribed Book, Ch 19, p. 447).
Expert witnesses must mention the grounds for their opinion, as they are "in principle
required to support their opinions with valid reasons" (FOR2609 Prescribed Book, Ch
19, p. 448). The true test for admissibility is whether the court can obtain valuable
assistance from the witness, as established in Gentiruco AG v Firestone SA (Pty) Ltd.
The court retains discretion to accept or reject opinion evidence, and the expert's role is
to assist, not replace, the court's function. Police officials can also be regarded as
experts if they have formal qualifications and experience in a specific area (FOR2609
Prescribed Book, Ch 19, p. 447).
DUE JULY 2026
Question 1 During Mr Matlala’s motor vehicle accident trial, the prosecution
intends to call a police reserve officer, Mr Sibiya, to testify as an expert witness
about whether Mr Matlala was drunk at the time of the accident. Mr Sibiya was not
at the accident scene and did not test Mr Matlala’s blood for alcohol content.
However, Mr Sibiya has many years of experience as a police reserve officer and
has attended numerous car accidents where drivers were found to be intoxicated
Mr Sibiya knows Mr Matlala personally, as a tavern owner, and they previously
had an altercation. Mr Mkhwanazi, an honest and seasoned police officer, saw the
accident when it happened; however, he was not requested to provide a
statement.
QUESTION 2.1: Explain the relationship between proof and the law of evidence
The law of evidence and proof are intrinsically linked in that the law of evidence
provides the procedural framework through which proof is established in court. Proof is
the objective, defined as "grounds for a ruling in terms of a fact in dispute" where "a fact
is proven when there are sufficient grounds for the presiding officer to accept the
existence of such fact" (FOR2609 Prescribed Book, Ch 16, p. 405).
The law of evidence, as "the entire body of legal rules that regulate the proof of facts in
a court of law" (FOR2609 Prescribed Book, Ch 16, p. 403), determines which evidence
may be submitted, how it should be submitted, and who may present it. Also, the law of
evidence sets the standard of proof in criminal cases, requiring the state to prove all
facts "beyond reasonable doubt" (FOR2609 Prescribed Book, Ch 16, p. 405). It also
governs the admissibility of evidence and allocates the burden of proof, with "the party
, who makes an allegation must prove that allegation" (FOR2609 Prescribed Book, Ch
16, p. 405). Thus, the law of evidence is the vehicle through which proof is furnished to
the court.
QUESTION 2.2: Discuss the requirements for a person to be allowed to testify in
court as an expert witness
For a person to testify as an expert witness, they must first demonstrate competence
based on specialist knowledge, training, skill, or experience, and must be able to assist
the court in deciding the issues on account of these attributes (FOR2609 Prescribed
Book, Ch 19, pp. 447-448). Formal qualifications are not always essential, as "practical
experience of the witness may often be decisive" and people with only practical
experience can also qualify as experts (FOR2609 Prescribed Book, Ch 19, p. 447).
Expert witnesses must mention the grounds for their opinion, as they are "in principle
required to support their opinions with valid reasons" (FOR2609 Prescribed Book, Ch
19, p. 448). The true test for admissibility is whether the court can obtain valuable
assistance from the witness, as established in Gentiruco AG v Firestone SA (Pty) Ltd.
The court retains discretion to accept or reject opinion evidence, and the expert's role is
to assist, not replace, the court's function. Police officials can also be regarded as
experts if they have formal qualifications and experience in a specific area (FOR2609
Prescribed Book, Ch 19, p. 447).
