What Is Res Gestae? A Guide to the Hearsay Exception in UK Law

What Is Res Gestae? A Guide to the Hearsay Exception in UK Law

Sometimes, words spoken in the heat of the moment can still be used in court – this is known as res gestae. If you or someone close to you is facing criminal proceedings, understanding how these spontaneous statements work under res gestae UK law can be crucial. These statements can influence how a case is investigated, prosecuted, and defended, even when the person who made them does not appear in court.

Res gestae is a long-standing exception to the hearsay rule. In simple terms, it allows the court to admit statements made during or immediately after a shocking or stressful event, because the law assumes the speaker had no time to invent or distort their words. The idea is that genuine, spontaneous statements are often more truthful than those made after reflection. The phrase “res gestae” comes from Latin and means “things done,” highlighting the close link between the event and the statement.

This guide explains everything you need to know about this important evidential rule. You’ll learn:

• What res gestae means in modern UK law
• How courts decide whether a statement is truly spontaneous
• The legal criteria judges use before admitting it
• Real-world examples of res gestae in criminal cases
• How criminal defence solicitors challenge unreliable or unfair hearsay

By the end, you’ll understand when res gestae can be used, when it should be questioned, and why expert legal advice is essential if this type of evidence appears in your case.

Understanding Res Gestae – The Legal Definition

Under Section 118(4) of the Criminal Justice Act 2003, the courts preserve the long-established common-law rule known as res gestae. In plain English, this rule allows certain spontaneous, out-of-court statements to be admitted as evidence, even though they would normally be excluded as hearsay. These are statements made during, or immediately after, a shocking or stressful event, where the speaker’s words are considered instinctive rather than fabricated.

Put simply, res gestae UK law treats a statement as more likely to be truthful when the person had no time to think, plan, or distort what they said. This logic underpins the doctrine: spontaneity suggests reliability. For example, a person shouting the name of their attacker while being assaulted is unlikely to have invented that information in the moment.

The leading case is R v Andrews (1987). In that decision, the Court set out the key test for judges:

• Was the person still emotionally overpowered by the event?
• Did they have any real opportunity to concoct or misrepresent what happened?
• Is the statement closely connected in time and circumstances to the event itself?

Judges therefore look at factors such as the timing of the statement, the level of stress or shock the speaker was under, and whether the remark genuinely relates to the unfolding incident. The more immediate and instinctive the statement appears, the more likely it is to qualify as res gestae.

This safeguard ensures the exception is not misused. Courts remain cautious because admitting hearsay without cross-examination can affect fairness, especially in serious criminal cases.

Res gestae evidence can bridge gaps when witnesses are unavailable or too shocked to testify.

The History and Legal Basis of Res Gestae in UK Law

The concept of res gestae has deep roots in English common law. Long before modern hearsay rules were introduced, courts recognised that some statements made in the heat of the moment carried a special weight because they were instinctive and unlikely to be fabricated. These early decisions formed the foundation of what later became the res gestae exception: a narrow but important route for admitting spontaneous statements as evidence.

When Parliament overhauled hearsay law through the Criminal Justice Act 2003, many older common-law exceptions were abolished or replaced. However, Section 118 specifically preserved certain categories that were considered essential to justice — including res gestae. This means the doctrine now exists as a statutory continuation of a long-standing common-law rule, rather than as an outdated legal relic.

CPS guidance on hearsay also acknowledges res gestae as one of the key exceptions that prosecutors may rely upon, but it emphasises that the test for admissibility is strict. That strictness reflects another core principle: the Human Rights Act 1998, particularly Article 6, which protects the right to a fair trial. Because res gestae evidence can be admitted without the speaker giving live evidence, judges must ensure fairness is not undermined.

Several cases have shaped the modern approach. R v Andrews (1987) remains the leading authority, establishing the “emotionally overpowered” test and confirming that spontaneity is central to reliability. Later cases, such as R v Barnes (2013), demonstrate the limits of the doctrine. In Barnes, the court refused res gestae status where the statement was not closely connected to the event, showing that courts remain cautious.

Today, judges apply a simple but careful approach: is the evidence necessary because live testimony is unavailable or impractical, and is it reliable because of the circumstances in which it was spoken? If either element fails, res gestae should not be admitted.

When Is Res Gestae Evidence Admissible?

Although hearsay is usually excluded, res gestae is one of the main exceptions that allows certain out-of-court statements to be used in UK criminal trials. Courts only admit this type of evidence when the circumstances strongly suggest the statement was spontaneous, instinctive, and free from deliberate invention.

Modern case law, particularly R v Andrews (1987), outlines three classic categories of admissible res gestae statements:

1. Statements made during the incidentThese are comments shouted or spoken while the event is unfolding — for example, a victim screaming the attacker’s name during a robbery.
2. Statements made shortly after the event while still under stressIf someone speaks moments after the incident, and they remain shocked, frightened, or emotionally overwhelmed, their words may be admissible. An example is a domestic abuse victim calling for help immediately after an attack, still crying and distressed.
3. Statements that accompany acts These are instinctive remarks made as part of the incident itself, such as a witness pointing to a suspect running away and saying, “That’s him!”

Criteria for Admissibility

Judges consider several factors before allowing res gestae evidence:

• Spontaneity — Was the statement made without time to think or fabricate?
• Emotional overpowering — Was the speaker still dominated by the stress of the event?
• Connection to the incident — Is the statement directly linked to what happened?
• Reliability — Does the surrounding evidence support the truthfulness?
• Relevance — Does the statement help clarify a key issue in the case?

Courts apply these criteria cautiously. The judge must be satisfied that admitting the statement will not unfairly prejudice the defendant or undermine the right to a fair trial.

Realistic Examples

Res gestae evidence might be admitted in situations such as:

• A victim shouting, “He stabbed me!” while holding a fresh wound.
• A bystander immediately telling police, “She drove through the red light!” after a road collision.
• A panicked 999 call made seconds after a violent assault.

In each case, the immediacy and emotional state suggest the speaker was not able to fabricate a story.

A Note of Caution

Even when res gestae applies, it cannot replace proper witness testimony. If the person is available to attend court, their live evidence should be preferred. Res gestae is meant to fill evidential gaps - not to create shortcuts for the prosecution.

For specialist advice on evidential issues in serious criminal cases, visit our Serious Crime Solicitors page.

Examples of Res Gestae in Practice

Understanding res gestae is much easier when you see how it works in real situations. The key feature is spontaneity - statements made instinctively, without time to think, reflect, or invent a story. Below are common examples that courts often consider.

A classic example is a victim crying out the attacker’s name during an assault. If someone shouts “It was John!” while being struck or moments after escaping, that statement may be admissible. The court recognises that a person in genuine fear is unlikely to pause and fabricate an accusation.

Another example is a bystander shouting what they witnessed seconds after the crime. Imagine someone running from a shop shouting, “He’s got a knife!” as the suspect flees. Because the remark is made in the heat of the moment, and the witness is still dominated by adrenaline and shock, it may be accepted as reliable.

A third example involves road traffic incidents. A driver immediately saying, “I couldn’t stop!” after a collision may also qualify as res gestae. The spontaneity suggests the driver has not had time to create an excuse; instead, they are reacting instinctively to the shock of the crash.

These examples share the same core principle: the speaker is still emotionally overwhelmed or caught up in the event, leaving little chance for distortion or invention.

What Would Not Be Res Gestae?

Not all statements made around an event qualify. Remarks such as:

• comments given hours later,
• statements made after speaking to others, or
• a calm, reflective account once the shock has passed

are unlikely to be admitted under the res gestae exception. At that point, the risk of reconstruction, influence, or deliberate wording is too high.

Res gestae is therefore a narrow but powerful exception - one that depends heavily on timing, emotion, and context.

Frequently Asked Questions

What is res gestae in UK law?

Res gestae in UK law is a hearsay exception that allows spontaneous statements made during or immediately after an event to be admitted as evidence. These statements are treated as reliable because they arise in the heat of the moment, leaving little time for fabrication. Under Section 118 of the Criminal Justice Act 2003, the common-law rule of res gestae is preserved. Courts often rely on this exception when witnesses cannot testify or are too distressed to give evidence, provided the statement is closely connected to the event and made under genuine pressure.

When is res gestae admissible in court?

Res gestae is admissible when a statement is made spontaneously during an incident or shortly after it, while the speaker is still affected by the event. Courts look for strong indicators of reliability, including:

• The statement was made under clear emotional stress.
• There was no time to create or distort a story.
• The words are directly linked to the incident.

Judges follow guidance from R v Andrews (1987) and Section 118 CJA 2003 when deciding admissibility. If the criteria are met, the statement may be treated as truthful even if the speaker does not testify.

How is res gestae different from hearsay evidence?

Res gestae is different from ordinary hearsay because it is specifically allowed by law due to its spontaneity and reliability. Ordinary hearsay is usually excluded because the speaker cannot be cross-examined. Res gestae statements, however, are admitted when:

1. They are made in the moment.
2. The speaker is under emotional pressure.
3. The statement clearly relates to the event.

This narrow exception allows the court to consider reliable statements that might otherwise be lost.

What does “emotionally overpowered” mean in res gestae?

“Emotionally overpowered” means the person making the statement is still under the stress, fear, or shock of the event and has not had time to reflect or invent a story. Courts assess this by looking at:

• Tone of voice
• Physical distress
• Proximity to the incident
• Behaviour immediately before and after

In R v Andrews, the court stressed that the speaker must still be dominated by the excitement of the event for the statement to qualify as res gestae.

What is Section 118 of the Criminal Justice Act 2003?

Section 118 of the Criminal Justice Act 2003 preserves certain common-law hearsay exceptions, including res gestae. It ensures that spontaneous statements made during or immediately after an event can still be admitted despite wider reforms to hearsay rules. This section confirms that long-standing principles (such as reliability through spontaneity) remain part of modern evidence law.

Can res gestae be challenged by the defence?

Yes, res gestae can be challenged by the defence. Solicitors often argue that:

• The statement was not spontaneous.
• The speaker had time to think or be influenced.
• The person was not emotionally overpowered.
• The link between the words and the event is weak or unclear.

If the defence shows that the statement is unreliable, irrelevant, or prejudicial, the court may exclude it to protect the defendant’s Article 6 right to a fair trial.

Is res gestae used in domestic abuse cases?

Yes, res gestae is often used in domestic abuse cases where victims withdraw, cannot testify, or are too frightened to appear in court. Courts may admit statements made during or immediately after the incident, such as distress calls or spontaneous comments to neighbours. However, judges must balance the need for truth with the defendant’s right to fair cross-examination, ensuring that the evidence is truly spontaneous and reliable.

Does res gestae apply in civil law?

Res gestae can apply in civil law, but it is used far less frequently than in criminal cases. Civil courts may consider spontaneous statements when they help explain actions or events and meet basic reliability standards. However, the civil system has broader hearsay rules under the Civil Evidence Act 1995, so res gestae is not usually needed as a standalone exception.

What happens if res gestae evidence is misused?

If res gestae evidence is misused, it can lead to unfair trials and potential appeals. Misuse includes admitting statements that were not truly spontaneous or emotionally driven. When this happens, higher courts may overturn convictions, order retrials, or criticise the trial judge’s approach. Defence solicitors closely examine such evidence to protect the defendant’s rights.

Why does res gestae still exist in modern law?

Res gestae still exists because it captures valuable evidence that might otherwise be lost, especially when witness testimony is unavailable. Despite modern hearsay reforms, courts recognise that spontaneous, emotion-driven statements can be highly reliable. Section 118 CJA 2003 preserves the rule to ensure these statements remain admissible, but judges apply strict safeguards to prevent unfairness.

How MMA Law Can Help if Res Gestae Evidence Affects Your Case

Res gestae evidence can play a decisive role in a criminal trial. Because these statements are often admitted without the speaker appearing in court, they can feel unfair, overwhelming, and difficult to challenge without the right legal support. Our team understands how stressful this is for defendants and their families, especially when a case hinges on statements made in moments of panic or fear.

At MMA Law, our defence solicitors have specialist experience dealing with complex evidential issues, including hearsay exceptions under Section 118 of the Criminal Justice Act 2003. We know how prosecutors rely on res gestae in cases involving violence, domestic abuse, and serious crime - and we know how to challenge it effectively.

We can help by:

• Conducting a full case review to examine whether the res gestae statement meets legal criteria.
• Challenging admissibility where spontaneity, reliability, or emotional pressure is unclear.
• Arguing breach of fair trial rights under Article 6 where cross-examination is essential.
• Preparing appeals where res gestae evidence was wrongly admitted.
• Building a strong defence strategy that examines timing, context, witness condition, and investigative procedure.

If res gestae has been raised in your case - or you believe the prosecution may rely on it - early legal advice is crucial. The sooner we are involved, the more we can do to protect your position.

Contact us today for a free 30-minute legal consultation to discuss your case in complete confidence.