Hearsay Evidence – A Complete Guide to UK Law

Imagine evidence being used in court even though the person who made the statement isn’t there to testify. It feels unfair, confusing, and even a little worrying - especially if you’re facing criminal charges. This is where hearsay evidence in UK law becomes important. Understanding how it works can make a real difference to your case.

Hearsay evidence is any statement made outside the courtroom that is later repeated in court to prove that the statement is true. It has always been controversial because the original speaker cannot be questioned or cross-examined. For that reason, hearsay is usually restricted - but it is not always banned. Under the Criminal Justice Act 2003, hearsay can be allowed in several situations, and these rules often surprise defendants and families.

In this guide, you’ll learn:

• What hearsay evidence means under UK law.
• When hearsay is allowed and when it must be excluded.
• The key legal rules, including the Criminal Justice Act 2003.
• Examples of hearsay evidence, from witness statements to digital messages.
• How hearsay can affect criminal trials and appeals.
• How MMA Law can challenge or defend hearsay evidence in your case.

This article breaks down a complex area of law into clear, practical steps so you understand your rights and the safeguards that protect you during a criminal investigation or trial.

What Is Hearsay Evidence?

Hearsay evidence has a precise legal meaning in the UK. Section 114(1) of the Criminal Justice Act 2003 defines it as: “A statement not made in oral evidence in the proceedings which is relied on as evidence of the matter stated.”

In plain English, hearsay is any out-of-court statement that someone repeats in court to prove that what was said is true. Instead of the person who originally made the statement giving evidence under oath, another person reports what they said.

Why Hearsay Is Traditionally Disallowed

Courts have always treated hearsay with caution because the original speaker cannot be cross-examined. Without cross-examination, the judge or jury cannot properly test:

• the person’s credibility
• whether they were mistaken
• whether they had a motive to lie
• whether the statement was taken out of context

This is why hearsay often feels unreliable. For example:

• “My friend told me the suspect confessed.”
• “Someone at the scene said they saw him run away.”
• “She said earlier that the drugs belonged to someone else.”

None of these statements come from the original speaker, yet they may be used to support a case.

When Hearsay Can Be Allowed

The Criminal Justice Act 2003 changed the old common-law hearsay rule and created clear situations where hearsay can be admitted. These include where the witness is unavailable, where the statement forms part of a business record, or where admitting the statement is “in the interests of justice”.

The law now tries to balance fairness with practicality. In some cases, hearsay is vital - for example, when a key witness is deceased or too ill to attend court. But it is still controlled carefully because of the risks it carries.

Why It Matters

Understanding hearsay evidence is essential for anyone facing criminal proceedings. It can shape how a case is built, what evidence can be challenged, and whether a trial is fair. Skilled defence solicitors analyse hearsay statements closely to ensure they meet legal standards and do not unfairly prejudice the defendant.

If you need expert guidance on hearsay or evidential issues, speak to our Criminal Defence Solicitors in Middlesbrough.

The Legal Framework Governing Hearsay Evidence

Hearsay evidence in criminal cases is governed primarily by Part 11, Chapter 2 of the Criminal Justice Act 2003. Before this Act, the hearsay rule was complex and based on scattered common-law principles. The 2003 reforms created a clearer structure, defining when hearsay is admissible and what safeguards must apply.

Key Provisions Explained

The Criminal Justice Act 2003 contains several sections that set out how hearsay operates in practice:

• Section 114 – General admissibility ruleThis is the core provision. It lists the situations where hearsay may be allowed, including statutory exceptions, common-law exceptions, party agreement, or when it is “in the interests of justice”.
• Section 116 – Unavailable witnessesHearsay can be admitted if the original witness cannot give evidence for reasons such as death, illness, intimidation, or being outside the UK and not reasonably expected to attend.
• Section 117 – Business and official documentsRecords created in the course of business or official duties can be admitted as hearsay, such as bank records, medical notes, or company logs.
• Section 118 – Preserved common-law exceptionsSome traditional exceptions remain, including public information, reputation evidence, and res gestae (statements made in the heat of the moment).
• Section 121 – Multiple hearsayAddresses cases with several layers of hearsay. It is only admissible if each layer fits a statutory exception or if the court allows it under the “interests of justice” test.

Civil Proceedings

While this guide focuses on criminal cases, it is worth noting that the Civil Evidence Act 1995 governs hearsay in civil courts, where the rules are more flexible.

Human Rights and the Horncastle Case

Hearsay must also comply with Article 6 of the European Convention on Human Rights, which guarantees the right to a fair trial. A major case, R v Horncastle (2009), confirmed that hearsay can be compatible with Article 6 when handled with proper safeguards. The Supreme Court stressed the need for reliability checks and judicial control to prevent unfairness.

Understanding this legal framework helps defendants see how hearsay can shape a case - and how experienced solicitors can challenge it.

For complex or serious cases involving evidential disputes, our Middlesbrough Solicitors can provide expert advice and representation - across the country.

When Can Hearsay Evidence Be Used in Court?

Although hearsay is generally inadmissible, UK law allows it in specific circumstances. The Criminal Justice Act 2003 sets out the situations where hearsay can be relied on, provided the court is satisfied that admitting it will not undermine the fairness of the trial. These exceptions exist because sometimes important evidence cannot be given directly in court.

Circumstances Where Hearsay May Be Admitted

Hearsay can be used in the following situations:

• Unavailable witness (Section 116 CJA 2003)Hearsay may be admitted if the witness cannot attend court due to death, physical illness, mental incapacity, fear or intimidation, or being outside the UK where attendance is not reasonably practicable.
• Business or official records (Section 117)Documents produced during routine business or public functions, such as financial records, phone logs, medical notes, or company reports, can be introduced as hearsay evidence.
• Agreed factsIf both the prosecution and defence agree certain facts are not in dispute, those facts can be presented as hearsay without needing the original witness.
• Admissions by defendantsStatements made by the defendant outside court — for example, comments made during interviews or to third parties — can be admitted as evidence of guilt.
• Interests of justice test (Section 114(1)(d))This is a flexible exception allowing hearsay where the court decides it is fair and necessary. When applying this test, judges consider:
  • the statement’s reliability
  • how important it is to the case
  • how difficult or unfair it would be to exclude it
  • the circumstances in which the statement was made
  • whether it can be tested in other ways

Hearsay is often used in fraud, financial crime, and complex conspiracy cases, where documents or recorded statements form a large part of the evidence.

Safeguards to Protect Fairness

Courts use several safeguards to protect the defendant’s rights:

• Judges have discretion to exclude unreliable hearsay.
• Juries receive warnings about the limits of hearsay.
• Defence solicitors can challenge the statement’s reliability and weight.

These safeguards ensure that hearsay does not replace proper, reliable evidence.

When Hearsay Cannot Be Used

Hearsay cannot be admitted when it creates an obvious risk of unfairness. Examples include:

• anonymous tips with no way to test reliability
• gossip or rumours passed through several people
• statements made under unclear or suspicious circumstances

Inadmissible hearsay often fails because the defence cannot cross-examine the original speaker, which is a core part of a fair trial.

Understanding when hearsay is allowed helps defendants prepare for how evidence may be used. In complex cases, early legal advice is essential to challenge unreliable statements and protect your rights.

Examples of Hearsay Evidence in UK Law

Understanding hearsay becomes much easier when you can see how it works in real cases. Below are clear examples showing what does and does not count as hearsay in UK criminal law.

Examples of Hearsay Evidence

Hearsay appears in many different forms, but the key feature is always the same: the court is being asked to rely on something said or written outside the courtroom as proof of the truth of that statement.

One common example is when a witness repeats a confession made by someone else. If a witness tells the court, “My friend said the defendant admitted stealing the car,” the friend is not present to confirm or explain what they meant. Because the statement is being used to prove that the confession happened, it becomes hearsay.

Hearsay can also arise through text messages, handwritten notes, or digital communications from someone who cannot attend court. If a message is introduced to show, for example, that a drug deal was arranged, and the sender is not available to give evidence, the court is being asked to rely on an out-of-court statement - making it hearsay.

Written witness statements can also fall into this category. When a witness dies, becomes seriously ill, or is too frightened to attend, the prosecution may ask the court to read their statement aloud under Section 116 of the Criminal Justice Act 2003. Although allowed in certain circumstances, the statement is still hearsay because it replaces live testimony.

In some cases, victims give recorded interviews to police but later cannot face giving evidence in court. Those recordings may still be used if the law on witness unavailability is satisfied, but they remain hearsay because the witness cannot be cross-examined.

These examples show that hearsay can emerge from spoken words, written documents, text messages, or recordings - the form does not matter as long as the court is being asked to rely on something said outside the trial.

Examples That Are Not Hearsay

Not all evidence involves hearsay. Many types of proof are considered direct evidence, meaning they come from a source that can be tested in court.

CCTV footage, for example, records events directly and does not involve anyone making a statement about what happened. Physical items such as weapons, fingerprints, DNA traces, or clothing are also not hearsay, because they are objects rather than statements.

Similarly, a live eyewitness giving evidence in court is offering direct testimony. They can be questioned by both sides, which removes the problem hearsay creates. Body-worn camera footage often falls into this category too, as long as the officer who recorded the footage is present in court to explain what happened.

These forms of evidence are not hearsay because the court can evaluate them directly and test their reliability through questioning and forensic analysis.

Key Takeaway

Whether something counts as hearsay depends on why it is being used. If it is being relied on to prove the truth of what was said, and the original speaker is not in court, it is likely to be hearsay. Its admissibility then depends on reliability, necessity, and the legal exceptions under the Criminal Justice Act 2003.

How Hearsay Evidence Is Challenged or Defended

Hearsay evidence can have a major impact on a criminal case, especially when it replaces direct testimony. Because it carries risks of unreliability, the defence has several tools to challenge it. Understanding how these challenges work helps defendants know what options may be available.

Objecting to Hearsay Before or During Trial

When the prosecution wants to rely on hearsay, the defence can challenge it at two key points:

• Before trial, during a pre-trial admissibility hearing.
• During the trial, when the prosecution attempts to introduce the evidence.

At either stage, the defence can argue that the evidence does not meet the conditions set out in the Criminal Justice Act 2003 (CJA 2003). These conditions include the witness being genuinely unavailable, the statement being reliable, or the evidence meeting the “interests of justice” test.

Challenging Reliability and Credibility

If hearsay is allowed into court, the defence can still attack the strength of the evidence by questioning:

• How reliable the original statement was: Was it made under stress, fear, or confusion?
• The motives of the original speaker: Did they have a reason to lie or exaggerate?
• Whether the speaker had the opportunity to observe what they claimed: For example, did they actually see the event?
• Whether the statement has changed across retellings: This is particularly important in cases involving multiple hearsay.

Even though the speaker is not in court, the defence can highlight inconsistencies or gaps in the evidence. This can significantly reduce its weight.

Judicial Directions and Safeguards

Judges play an important role when hearsay is used. They may:

• Warn the jury that hearsay is less reliable because the speaker cannot be cross-examined.
• Explain the limited purpose for which the statement can be used.
• Instruct the jury to consider reliability, consistency, and context.

These safeguards aim to prevent unfair prejudice.

Excluding Hearsay Under Section 78 PACE 1984

The defence can also ask the court to exclude hearsay entirely under Section 78 of the Police and Criminal Evidence Act 1984, if admitting it would make the trial unfair. This is common when:

• The statement is weak or unreliable.
• It is impossible to test the accuracy of the account.
• The prosecution relies heavily on hearsay as a key part of its case.

How We Challenge Hearsay

At MMA Law, our criminal defence solicitors carefully analyse every piece of proposed hearsay evidence. We:

• Examine whether the prosecution meets statutory requirements under the CJA 2003.
• Challenge unreliable or prejudicial statements.
• Raise objections during admissibility hearings.
• Request exclusion under Section 78 PACE where appropriate.
• Appeal any wrongful admission of hearsay evidence.

Hearsay can make or break a case. Our team ensures that only fair, lawful, and properly tested evidence is presented in court. If hearsay plays a part in your case, our Middlesbrough based solicitors and legal team are ready to provide expert advice and representation.

Multiple Hearsay and Complex Cases

Multiple hearsay arises when a hearsay statement contains another layer of hearsay within it. Under Section 121 of the Criminal Justice Act 2003, this type of evidence is treated with particular caution. It is only admissible if each stage of the statement meets a recognised statutory exception or satisfies the “interests of justice” test. This ensures that the court does not rely on information that becomes weaker or more unreliable with each additional layer.

A simple example helps illustrate the point. Imagine a witness tells the court: “Mark told me that Sarah said the defendant admitted the robbery.” Mark is not present, and Sarah is not present either. The court is being asked to rely on what Sarah allegedly said, passed through Mark, and then repeated by the witness. Each layer moves further away from the original speaker, making it harder to judge accuracy, reliability, or motive.

Because of these risks, courts rarely admit multiple hearsay unless there is strong supporting evidence or a compelling reason why the original speakers cannot attend. Judges must consider whether the statement is reliable, whether it is necessary, and whether admitting it would be fair to the defendant. They may also warn the jury about treating such evidence with caution.

In serious or complex cases (particularly fraud, conspiracy, or organised crime investigations) multiple hearsay may be put forward where witnesses are unavailable or documents contain several linked statements. Even then, the threshold is high. The defence can often challenge these statements successfully, arguing they carry too much uncertainty to be safe to rely on.

Frequently Asked Questions

What is hearsay evidence in UK law?

Hearsay evidence in UK law is any statement made outside court that is presented in court to prove the truth of what was said. In simple terms, it involves repeating something said by someone who is not giving live evidence. Under Section 114(1) of the Criminal Justice Act 2003, hearsay is defined as a statement “not made in oral evidence” that is relied upon to establish a fact.

Hearsay matters because the original speaker cannot be questioned, which affects fairness and reliability. UK courts generally avoid hearsay unless a specific legal exception applies.

When is hearsay evidence admissible in court?

Hearsay evidence is admissible in court when it falls within the exceptions listed in the Criminal Justice Act 2003. The law allows hearsay where a witness is unavailable, where the statement is contained in business records, where both parties agree the fact is not disputed, or where admitting the evidence serves the “interests of justice.”

Courts must still consider reliability, necessity, and whether the defendant would be unfairly prejudiced. Judges can direct juries to treat hearsay with caution and may exclude it if it undermines the fairness of the trial.

What are the exceptions to hearsay evidence?

Exceptions to hearsay evidence come from the Criminal Justice Act 2003 and preserved common-law rules. Key exceptions include:

• Unavailable witness (death, illness, fear, absence).
• Business or official documents created in the course of professional duties.
• Res gestae statements, made spontaneously in the heat of the moment.
• Agreed facts, where the defence does not contest the evidence.
• Interests of justice, where the court decides the evidence should be allowed.

These exceptions reflect circumstances where hearsay is considered reliable enough to be used.

Can hearsay evidence convict someone?

Yes, hearsay evidence can convict someone in UK law, but only if the court finds it reliable and fair to admit. The judge must decide whether the evidence meets the strict criteria under the Criminal Justice Act 2003 and whether it complies with Article 6 of the European Convention on Human Rights.

Courts approach hearsay cautiously. They often require supporting evidence to confirm its reliability, particularly when the hearsay forms a major part of the prosecution case. Juries are given warnings about treating hearsay with care.

What is the Criminal Justice Act 2003 hearsay rule?

The Criminal Justice Act 2003 hearsay rule sets out when hearsay can be used in criminal cases. Under Section 114, hearsay is normally inadmissible unless it falls under a statutory exception, relates to an unavailable witness, is contained in a business document, or is admitted in the interests of justice.

The Act replaced many old common-law rules and created a clearer, more structured framework. It also includes safeguards to ensure fairness, such as the ability to exclude unreliable evidence.

What does “interests of justice” mean for hearsay?

The “interests of justice” test for hearsay means the court can allow hearsay if doing so is necessary and fair. Judges consider several factors, including:

1. How reliable the statement appears.
2. Whether the original speaker could give live evidence.
3. The importance of the evidence to the case.
4. The difficulty of obtaining better evidence.
5. Any risk of prejudice to the defendant.

This test, found in Section 114(1)(d) of the Criminal Justice Act 2003, gives courts flexibility while protecting the right to a fair trial.

What is multiple hearsay?

Multiple hearsay is a statement that contains another layer of hearsay, meaning one out-of-court statement is based on another. Under Section 121 of the Criminal Justice Act 2003, it is only admissible if each layer meets a statutory exception or passes the interests-of-justice test.

For example, if Witness A repeats what Witness B said about what Witness C claimed, the court must assess the reliability and necessity at every stage. Courts admit multiple hearsay only in rare and well-justified cases.

Is hearsay evidence allowed in civil cases?

Yes, hearsay evidence is allowed much more freely in civil cases under the Civil Evidence Act 1995. Unlike criminal trials, where fairness and the right to cross-examine are critical, civil courts focus more on overall reliability.

Parties must still give notice if they plan to rely on hearsay, and the court will consider how much weight the evidence deserves. Hearsay in civil cases is assessed for credibility rather than strict admissibility.

Can hearsay evidence be challenged?

Yes, hearsay evidence can be challenged by questioning its reliability, relevance, and fairness. Defence solicitors may argue that:

• The original speaker is available and should give live evidence.
• The statement is unreliable or taken out of context.
• The hearsay does not meet any statutory exception.
• Admitting the evidence would breach the defendant’s right to a fair trial.

The defence can also invite the judge to exclude the evidence under Section 78 of PACE 1984 if its use would be unfair.

What happens if hearsay is wrongly admitted?

If hearsay is wrongly admitted, the defence can challenge it during trial or raise it on appeal. Incorrectly admitted hearsay may breach the defendant’s Article 6 right to a fair trial.

If the appellate court finds that the evidence should not have been admitted and that it affected the safety of the conviction, the conviction may be quashed. The case might be retried without the improper evidence.

For this reason, hearsay rulings are often central to appeal cases.

How MMA Law Can Help if Hearsay Evidence Affects Your Case

Hearsay evidence can feel confusing, unfair, and overwhelming. Especially if you believe the court is relying on statements from people who are not there to be questioned. Many clients worry that hearsay will be taken at face value or used in a way that misrepresents what really happened. At MMA Law, we understand how stressful this can be, and we work hard to protect your rights at every stage.

Our defence solicitors examine the evidence carefully to decide whether the hearsay has been admitted lawfully under the Criminal Justice Act 2003. We assess the reliability of the original statement, the circumstances in which it was made, and whether the prosecution has met the strict legal tests required. If the hearsay appears weak, unfair, or inadmissible, we challenge it through pre-trial applications, admissibility hearings, or requests to exclude the evidence under Section 78 of PACE.

We also represent clients in appeals where hearsay played a central role in the conviction. In many cases, wrongly admitted hearsay can undermine the fairness of the trial and form strong grounds for challenging the verdict. Our team builds robust legal arguments, supported by case law and expert analysis, to strengthen your position.

If hearsay evidence may affect your case, contact us today for a free 30-minute legal consultation. We’ll explain your options, help you understand the strengths and weaknesses of the evidence, and guide you through the next steps with clarity and confidence. Our experienced team defends clients across the UK in complex, high-stakes cases involving evidential issues.