QUEENSLAND BAR EVIDENCE EXAM TEST BANK ACTUAL 2026/2027
HIGH YIELD PRACTICE QUESTIONS AND STUDY GUIDE ACCURATE
EXAM COMPLETE REAL QUESTIONS AND CORRECT VERIFIED
ANSWERS WITH DETAILED RATIONALES (RELIABLE SOLUTIONS)
CURRENTLY UPDATED VERSION 2026 EDITION |GUARANTEED PASS
A+ | JUST RELEASED QUEENSLAND BAR EVIDENCE EXAM
APPROVED EXAM | INSTANT DOWNLOAD PDF
Question 1
Which of the following best describes the relationship between
relevance and admissibility under the Evidence Act 1977 (Qld)?
A) All relevant evidence is admissible unless excluded by a specific rule
of law.
B) Relevance is a necessary but not sufficient condition for
admissibility; evidence must also not be excluded by any exclusionary
rule or discretion. Correct Answer
C) Evidence that is relevant is automatically admissible regardless of
how it was obtained.
D) Relevance is determined solely by the judge's discretion and is not
governed by any legal test.
,Rationale: Relevance is the first hurdle for admissibility. Under the
Evidence Act 1977 (Qld), evidence is relevant if it could rationally
affect the assessment of the probability of the existence of a fact in issue.
However, relevance alone does not guarantee admissibility. The
evidence must also survive exclusionary rules such as the hearsay rule,
opinion rule, and credibility rule, as well as discretionary exclusions
such as the unfair prejudice discretion. Therefore, relevance is necessary
but not sufficient. Option A is incorrect because it suggests all relevant
evidence is admissible unless excluded, ignoring that exclusionary rules
operate independently. Option C ignores exclusionary rules entirely.
Option D misstates the law, as relevance is a legal test, not solely
discretionary.
Question 2
In a criminal trial in Queensland, the prosecution seeks to adduce
evidence that the accused possessed a large sum of cash shortly after the
alleged robbery. The accused objects. Which of the following is the most
accurate statement of the test for relevance?
A) The evidence is relevant only if it directly proves the accused
committed the robbery.
B) The evidence is relevant if, when considered with other evidence, it
could rationally affect the assessment of the probability that the accused
committed the robbery. Correct Answer
,C) The evidence is relevant only if the prosecution can prove beyond
reasonable doubt that the cash came from the robbery.
D) The evidence is relevant only if the accused admits the cash came
from the robbery.
Rationale: Under the Evidence Act 1977 (Qld), relevance is determined
by whether the evidence, if accepted, could rationally affect the
assessment of the probability of a fact in issue. The evidence need not
directly prove the fact; it is sufficient that it forms part of a chain of
reasoning that could affect the probability. Possession of a large sum of
cash shortly after a robbery could rationally affect the probability that
the accused was involved, even though it does not conclusively prove it.
Option A sets the threshold too high. Option C confuses relevance with
the standard of proof. Option D confuses relevance with admissibility
based on admissions.
Question 3
Which of the following is NOT a fact in issue in a criminal trial for
murder in Queensland?
A) Whether the accused caused the death of the deceased.
B) Whether the accused intended to kill or cause grievous bodily harm.
C) Whether the accused has a prior conviction for a similar offence.
Correct Answer
, D) Whether the accused was acting in self-defence.
Rationale: Facts in issue are those facts that the prosecution must prove
(or the defence must disprove) to establish the elements of the offence or
a defence. In a murder trial, the prosecution must prove that the accused
caused the death, that the accused intended to kill or cause grievous
bodily harm, and that no defence (such as self-defence) applies. A prior
conviction for a similar offence is not a fact in issue; it is evidence that
may be relevant to credibility or propensity but is not an element of the
offence. Option C is therefore not a fact in issue.
Question 4
Which of the following statements about the Christie discretion in
Queensland is correct?
A) The Christie discretion allows the judge to exclude evidence that is
relevant but whose probative value is outweighed by the danger of unfair
prejudice.
B) The Christie discretion is a common law discretion that has been
preserved by the Evidence Act 1977 (Qld) and allows exclusion where
the probative value of evidence is outweighed by the danger of unfair
prejudice. Correct Answer
C) The Christie discretion only applies to prosecution evidence in
criminal trials.
HIGH YIELD PRACTICE QUESTIONS AND STUDY GUIDE ACCURATE
EXAM COMPLETE REAL QUESTIONS AND CORRECT VERIFIED
ANSWERS WITH DETAILED RATIONALES (RELIABLE SOLUTIONS)
CURRENTLY UPDATED VERSION 2026 EDITION |GUARANTEED PASS
A+ | JUST RELEASED QUEENSLAND BAR EVIDENCE EXAM
APPROVED EXAM | INSTANT DOWNLOAD PDF
Question 1
Which of the following best describes the relationship between
relevance and admissibility under the Evidence Act 1977 (Qld)?
A) All relevant evidence is admissible unless excluded by a specific rule
of law.
B) Relevance is a necessary but not sufficient condition for
admissibility; evidence must also not be excluded by any exclusionary
rule or discretion. Correct Answer
C) Evidence that is relevant is automatically admissible regardless of
how it was obtained.
D) Relevance is determined solely by the judge's discretion and is not
governed by any legal test.
,Rationale: Relevance is the first hurdle for admissibility. Under the
Evidence Act 1977 (Qld), evidence is relevant if it could rationally
affect the assessment of the probability of the existence of a fact in issue.
However, relevance alone does not guarantee admissibility. The
evidence must also survive exclusionary rules such as the hearsay rule,
opinion rule, and credibility rule, as well as discretionary exclusions
such as the unfair prejudice discretion. Therefore, relevance is necessary
but not sufficient. Option A is incorrect because it suggests all relevant
evidence is admissible unless excluded, ignoring that exclusionary rules
operate independently. Option C ignores exclusionary rules entirely.
Option D misstates the law, as relevance is a legal test, not solely
discretionary.
Question 2
In a criminal trial in Queensland, the prosecution seeks to adduce
evidence that the accused possessed a large sum of cash shortly after the
alleged robbery. The accused objects. Which of the following is the most
accurate statement of the test for relevance?
A) The evidence is relevant only if it directly proves the accused
committed the robbery.
B) The evidence is relevant if, when considered with other evidence, it
could rationally affect the assessment of the probability that the accused
committed the robbery. Correct Answer
,C) The evidence is relevant only if the prosecution can prove beyond
reasonable doubt that the cash came from the robbery.
D) The evidence is relevant only if the accused admits the cash came
from the robbery.
Rationale: Under the Evidence Act 1977 (Qld), relevance is determined
by whether the evidence, if accepted, could rationally affect the
assessment of the probability of a fact in issue. The evidence need not
directly prove the fact; it is sufficient that it forms part of a chain of
reasoning that could affect the probability. Possession of a large sum of
cash shortly after a robbery could rationally affect the probability that
the accused was involved, even though it does not conclusively prove it.
Option A sets the threshold too high. Option C confuses relevance with
the standard of proof. Option D confuses relevance with admissibility
based on admissions.
Question 3
Which of the following is NOT a fact in issue in a criminal trial for
murder in Queensland?
A) Whether the accused caused the death of the deceased.
B) Whether the accused intended to kill or cause grievous bodily harm.
C) Whether the accused has a prior conviction for a similar offence.
Correct Answer
, D) Whether the accused was acting in self-defence.
Rationale: Facts in issue are those facts that the prosecution must prove
(or the defence must disprove) to establish the elements of the offence or
a defence. In a murder trial, the prosecution must prove that the accused
caused the death, that the accused intended to kill or cause grievous
bodily harm, and that no defence (such as self-defence) applies. A prior
conviction for a similar offence is not a fact in issue; it is evidence that
may be relevant to credibility or propensity but is not an element of the
offence. Option C is therefore not a fact in issue.
Question 4
Which of the following statements about the Christie discretion in
Queensland is correct?
A) The Christie discretion allows the judge to exclude evidence that is
relevant but whose probative value is outweighed by the danger of unfair
prejudice.
B) The Christie discretion is a common law discretion that has been
preserved by the Evidence Act 1977 (Qld) and allows exclusion where
the probative value of evidence is outweighed by the danger of unfair
prejudice. Correct Answer
C) The Christie discretion only applies to prosecution evidence in
criminal trials.
