Without prejudice statement
johan
(Querist) 04 July 2015
This query is : Resolved
I had written emails to my wife in which I made a statement that I am sorry for hitting her and hurting her and the body of the emails clearly shows my efforts to settle our marital dispute. My wife has also made statements showing her intention to settle the dispute if I apologize and stop drinking.She has now submitted the emails in her divorce petition as evidence. Can the emails be dismissed as evidence in court saying that the statements were made without prejudice and to settle the dispute?Does Section 23 of the evidence act cover this?
dr g balakrishnan
(Expert) 05 July 2015
WHEN SUBMITTED AS A PROOF HOW THAT COULD BE DISMISSED MR WISEMAN
Biswanath Roy
(Expert) 05 July 2015
In civil cases no admission u/s.23 of the Evidence ACT is relevant, if it is made either upon an express condition that evidence of it is not to be given or under circumstances from which the Court can infer that the parties agreed together that evidence of it should not be given.
ABDUL RAZIQUE
(Expert) 05 July 2015
Section 23 of the Evidence ACT is applicable only to civil cases and gives effect to the maxim, interest reiplicae ut sit finis litium. It means that in the interest of the state there should be end of litigation. The section expressly provides that in civil cases an admission is not relevant when it is made: (i) upon an express condition that evidence of it is not to be given. It means that when a person admits the liability upon express condition that evidence of such admission should not be given, or (ii) under circumstances from which the court can infer that the litigating parties agreed together that evidence of it should not be given.
It is very often found that the litigating parties, by negotiations, want to settle their disputes amicably, and the negotiations usually takes place out of the Court. “Very often for the purpose of buying peace and settling disputes by a compromise people made so many settlements, if such settlements are allowed to be proved in court,” it will become impossible for people to reach any compromise. Section 23 provides protection for negotiation.
When one of the parties to the dispute writes to the other making an offer for settlement in certain terms he may stipulate that in case his offer is not accepted his letter is not to be used against him as an admission of liability.” Such letter of communications made “without prejudice” and is not accepted to be admissible as evidence. “Confidential overtures of pacification and any other offers or propositions between litigating parties, expressly or impliedly made without prejudice are excluded on grounds of public policy,” otherwise the clever and ingenious man may frustrate the spint of law when he knows the weak points of the case of his opponent. For example, if parties are to be prejudiced by efforts to compromise, it will be impossible to attempt any amicable arrangement of differences. Admission or statements which are proved to be wrong or mistaken are not binding on the party making it. Lord Mansfield once observed that “all men must be permitted to buy peace without prejudice to them should the offer not succeed, such offers being made to stop litigation without regard to the question whether anything is due or not.” Thus the letter marked “without prejudice” protects subsequent and even previous letter in the same correspondence. The fact is that a document is stated to have been written “without prejudice” will not exclude it.
According to Section 23 an admission will not be relevant if it is given on condition either express or implied. It is strictly confined to the cases where there is dispute and negotiation for settlement of dispute between parties is going on. For example, the plaintiff was injured while he was getting down from the train when the train just started to move at the time of his getting down.
“The evidence as to negotiation of compromise and the statements made during such negotiations are generally without prejudice. It is ordinarily against public policy to admit such evidence. The statements made in the compromise petition even if treated as valid admissions, cannot be treated as evidence when the compromise fails.”
The principle of “without prejudice” has no application in criminal cases. Similarly, if the statement is not related to the purpose of negotiation it is also not protected.
Dr J C Vashista
(Expert) 06 July 2015
I agree with expert advise of Sr. Advocate Mr. Biswanath Roy and Mr. Abdul Razique. The statements made through e-mails is not admissible u/s 23 IEA.
