Comparative Criminal Law Paper - Norway V Australia

Rules of Evidence:

How does the Norwegian legal system differ with the Australian legal system when the rules of admissible evidence in criminal trials are examined?

14th April 2008

Contents

1.0 Introduction 3

1.1 Terminology_________________________________________________
___________3

2.0 Rules of Evidence in Norway______________________________________________4

2.1 Main rule: all evidence is allowed in the court room___________________________4
2.1.1 The law_________________________________________________________
_______4
2.1.2 Role of the judge_______________________________________________________
__4

2.2 Exceptions to the main rule________________________________________________5

2.3 Case law_________________________________________________________
_______6

2.4 The power of the judges___________________________________________________7

3.0 Rules of Evidence in Australia______________________________________________8

3.1 Main rule: strict rules of evidence ___________________________________________8
3.1.1 Emphasis on protecting the accused____________________________________________9

3.2 Problems with and critics of Australian Evidentiary Laws_______________________10

4.0 Conclusion__________________________________________________
_____________12

5.0 Bibliography________________________________________________
_____________13

1.0 Introduction

The adversarial and the inquisitorial system are two different systems of law. While the adversarial system is generally adopted in common law countries, the inquisitorial system is usually found on the continent of Europe among civil law systems. An example of a country with an adversarial system is Australia, whilst the criminal system in Norway has many features of an inquisitorial system.

In both the adversarial and inquisitorial criminal justice systems, the State determines whether or not an offence