Presentation of evidence - Contradiction

Learning Outcomes

After reading this article, you will understand how contradiction operates as a method of impeaching witnesses in evidence law. You will be able to identify when and how contradiction is permitted, distinguish contradiction from other forms of impeachment, recognize its limits, and apply these principles to MBE-style questions.

MBE Syllabus

For MBE, you are required to understand the use of contradiction as a tool for challenging witness credibility. In your revision, focus on:

  • Contradiction as a method of impeaching witnesses.
  • The distinction between contradiction and other impeachment techniques.
  • The rules governing when extrinsic evidence of contradiction is admissible.
  • The definition and application of "collateral matters" in contradiction.
  • The relationship between contradiction and the scope of cross-examination.

Test Your Knowledge

Attempt these questions before reading this article. If you find some difficult or cannot remember the answers, remember to look more closely at that area during your revision.

  1. Which of the following best describes contradiction as used in evidence law?
    1. Introducing evidence of a witness’s prior convictions.
    2. Challenging a witness with evidence that disputes their in-court testimony.
    3. Showing a witness’s bias by revealing their relationship to a party.
    4. Using prior inconsistent statements to prove the truth of the matter asserted.
  2. When is extrinsic evidence of contradiction generally inadmissible?
    1. When it relates to a material fact.
    2. When it concerns a collateral matter.
    3. When it is offered during cross-examination.
    4. When it is based on a prior inconsistent statement.
  3. If a witness testifies that it was raining at the time of an accident, which of the following is a proper method of contradiction?
    1. Asking about their criminal record.
    2. Introducing a weather report showing it was not raining.
    3. Questioning their reputation for truthfulness.
    4. Showing they were not present at the scene.

Introduction

Contradiction is a fundamental method for challenging the credibility of a witness in evidence law. It involves presenting evidence—either from another witness or from documents—that directly disputes the truth of a witness’s in-court testimony. Contradiction is distinct from other impeachment techniques, such as showing bias or prior inconsistent statements, and is subject to specific rules regarding the use of extrinsic evidence.

Key Term: Contradiction The process of challenging a witness’s testimony by introducing evidence that directly disputes a specific factual assertion made by the witness in court.

Contradiction as a Method of Impeachment

Contradiction is used to show that a witness’s testimony is factually incorrect. This can be done by confronting the witness with evidence that is inconsistent with their statements. Contradiction may occur during cross-examination or by introducing other evidence.

Contradiction is not the same as impeachment by prior inconsistent statement, which involves showing that the witness previously made a statement inconsistent with their current testimony. Contradiction focuses on the truth or falsity of the in-court statement itself.

Key Term: Collateral Matter A fact not directly relevant to the issues in the case and introduced solely for the purpose of contradicting a witness.

Limits on Contradiction: Collateral Matters

A key limitation on contradiction is the collateral matter rule. If the contradiction concerns a collateral matter—one not directly relevant to the issues in the case—extrinsic evidence (e.g., testimony from another witness or documents) is generally not admissible. The cross-examiner is bound by the witness’s answer on collateral matters.

However, if the contradiction concerns a material fact—one that is relevant to the issues in dispute—extrinsic evidence may be admitted to contradict the witness.

Key Term: Extrinsic Evidence Evidence from a source other than the witness being cross-examined, such as testimony from another witness or documents, used to contradict or impeach.

Contradiction and the Scope of Cross-Examination

Contradiction is most commonly attempted during cross-examination. The examiner may ask questions designed to elicit admissions that contradict the witness’s earlier statements. If the contradiction concerns a material issue, extrinsic evidence may be introduced if the witness denies the contradiction.

If the contradiction concerns a collateral issue, the examiner must accept the witness’s answer and may not introduce extrinsic evidence to dispute it.

Worked Example 1.1

A witness testifies that she saw the defendant at the scene of a burglary at 10 p.m. The defense calls a second witness who testifies that the first witness was at a movie theater across town at 10 p.m.

Answer: The defense is properly using contradiction to challenge the first witness’s testimony on a material fact. Because the contradiction concerns a material issue (the witness’s presence at the scene), extrinsic evidence is admissible.

Worked Example 1.2

During cross-examination, a witness testifies that she always wears a blue scarf to work. The opposing party seeks to introduce a photograph showing the witness at work wearing a red scarf.

Answer: This is contradiction on a collateral matter (the color of the scarf is not relevant to the issues in the case). The cross-examiner is bound by the witness’s answer and may not introduce extrinsic evidence.

Exam Warning

Contradiction is often confused with impeachment by prior inconsistent statement. Remember: contradiction disputes the truth of the in-court statement, while prior inconsistent statement focuses on the witness’s credibility by showing inconsistency.

Revision Tip

Before attempting to contradict a witness, always ask whether the fact is material to the case. If not, extrinsic evidence will not be allowed.

Key Point Checklist

This article has covered the following key knowledge points:

  • Contradiction is a method of impeaching a witness by disputing their in-court testimony.
  • Contradiction differs from impeachment by prior inconsistent statement.
  • Extrinsic evidence of contradiction is admissible only on material (non-collateral) matters.
  • On collateral matters, the examiner is bound by the witness’s answer and cannot introduce extrinsic evidence.
  • Contradiction is usually attempted during cross-examination.

Key Terms and Concepts

  • Contradiction
  • Collateral Matter
  • Extrinsic Evidence
The answers, solutions, explanations, and written content provided on this page represent PastPaperHero's interpretation of academic material and potential responses to given questions. These are not guaranteed to be the only correct or definitive answers or explanations. Alternative valid responses, interpretations, or approaches may exist. If you believe any content is incorrect, outdated, or could be improved, please get in touch with us and we will review and make necessary amendments if we deem it appropriate. As per our terms and conditions, PastPaperHero shall not be held liable or responsible for any consequences arising. This includes, but is not limited to, incorrect answers in assignments, exams, or any form of testing administered by educational institutions or examination boards, as well as any misunderstandings or misapplications of concepts explained in our written content. Users are responsible for verifying that the methods, procedures, and explanations presented align with those taught in their respective educational settings and with current academic standards. While we strive to provide high-quality, accurate, and up-to-date content, PastPaperHero does not guarantee the completeness or accuracy of our written explanations, nor any specific outcomes in academic understanding or testing, whether formal or informal.
No resources available.

Job & Test Prep on a Budget

Compare PastPaperHero's subscription offering to the wider market

PastPaperHero
Monthly Plan
$10
AdaptiBar
One-time Fee
$395
Assessment Day
One-time Fee
$20-39
BarPrepHero
One-time Fee
$299
Job Test Prep
One-time Fee
$90-350
Quimbee
One-time Fee
$1,199

Note the above prices are approximate and based on prices listed on the respective websites as of May 2025. Prices may vary based on location, currency exchange rates, and other factors.

Get unlimited access to thousands of practice questions, flashcards, and detailed explanations. Save over 90% compared to one-time courses while maintaining the flexibility to learn at your own pace.

All-in-one Learning Platform

Everything you need to master your assessments and job tests in one place

  • Comprehensive Content

    Access thousands of fully explained questions and cases across multiple subjects

  • Visual Learning

    Understand complex concepts with intuitive diagrams and flowcharts

  • Focused Practice

    Prepare for assessments with targeted practice materials and expert guidance

  • Personalized Learning

    Track your progress and focus on areas where you need improvement

  • Affordable Access

    Get quality educational resources at a fraction of traditional costs

Tell Us What You Think

Help us improve our resources by sharing your experience

Pleased to share that I have successfully passed the SQE1 exam on 1st attempt. With SQE2 exempted, I’m now one step closer to getting enrolled as a Solicitor of England and Wales! Would like to thank my seniors, colleagues, mentors and friends for all the support during this grueling journey. This is one of the most difficult bar exams in the world to undertake, especially alongside a full time job! So happy to help out any aspirant who may be reading this message! I had prepared from the University of Law SQE Manuals and the AI powered MCQ bank from PastPaperHero.

Saptarshi Chatterjee

Saptarshi Chatterjee

Senior Associate at Trilegal