Commentary on Sections Part 11 - Evidence Chapter 2: Hearsay evidence Section 118: Preservation of common law categories of admissibility
411.This section preserves a number of common law exceptions to the old rule against the admission of hearsay evidence. The preservation of these rules means that in the specified circumstances, an out of court statement will be admissible as evidence of any matters stated in it. Many of these rules were also preserved under the corresponding civil evidence provisions in section 7 of the Civil Evidence Act 1995. The common law rules preserved in paragraphs (1) to (8) are as follows:
	‘Public information’ will be admissible. This includes published works; public documents; records of certain courts, treaties, Crown grants, pardons and commissions; evidence relating to a person’s age or date of birth;
	‘Reputation as to character’ will be admissible as evidence of a person’s good or bad character;
	‘Reputation or family tradition’ will be admissible as evidence to prove or disprove pedigree or the existence of marriage; a public or general right; or the identity of a person or thing.
	‘Res gestae’ will be admissible (this rule is explained below);
	‘Confessions’ will be admissible as long as they fulfil the requirements of sections 76, 76A and 78 of the Police and Criminal Evidence Act 1984;
	‘Admissions by agents’ will be admissible against the defendant as evidence of any fact stated.
	The rule of ‘common enterprise’ is preserved. This means that a statement made by a party to a common enterprise will be admissible against another party to the enterprise as evidence of any matter stated. For example, if it is independently proved that A and B are involved in a joint enterprise to rob a jewellers’, any incriminating statements made by A will also be admissible against B.
	The rule of ‘expert evidence’ is preserved. This permits an expert to give evidence of any relevant matter which forms part of his professional expertise (although not acquired through personal experience) and to draw upon technical information widely used by members of the expert’s profession.
412.Paragraph (4) preserves the common law rule known as “res gestae”. One justification for this exception is that reported words which are very closely connected to a relevant event are reliable accounts and should therefore be admissible in certain circumstances. Such statement may be admitted if one of the following conditions is met:
	the statement is made by a person who was so emotionally overpowered by an event that the possibility that he was lying can be disregarded;
	the statement accompanied an act which can properly be evaluated as evidence only if considered together with the statement. For example, if the act doesn’t make sense without the statement; or
the statement relates to a physical sensation or mental state, such as an intention or emotion.