Propose a change

The Criminal Procedure Rules 2025

Write the words of this act the way you think they should read. Solon shows your change as a redline against the published text and pins it to that exact text, so it can never be applied to wording you did not see.

Change 1

What to do with it
As published

48.15 Credibility and consistency of maker of written witness statement or other hearsay

(1) This rule applies where a party wants to challenge the credibility or consistency of a person who made a statement which another party wants to introduce as hearsay. (2) The party who wants to challenge the credibility or consistency of that person must— (a) serve notice of intention to do so on— (i) the court officer, and (ii) the party who served the hearsay; and (b) in it, identify any statement or other material on which that party relies. (3) A respondent who wants to challenge such a person’s credibility or consistency must serve such a notice not more than 5 business days after service of the hearsay by the applicant. (4) An applicant who wants to challenge such a person’s credibility or consistency must serve such a notice not more than 3 business days after service of the hearsay by the respondent. (5) The party who served the hearsay— (a) may call that person to give oral evidence instead; and (b) if so, must serve notice of intention to do so on— (i) the court officer, and (ii) the other party as soon as practicable after service of the notice under paragraph (2). [Note. Section 5(2) of the Civil Evidence Act 1995 describes the procedure for challenging the credibility of the maker of a statement of which hearsay evidence is introduced. See also section 6 of that Act. The 1995 Act does not allow the introduction of evidence of a previous inconsistent statement otherwise than in accordance with sections 5, 6 and 7 of the Criminal Procedure Act 1865.]

Your change, as a redline

48.15 Credibility and consistency of maker of written witness statement or other hearsay

(1) This rule applies where a party wants to challenge the credibility or consistency of a person who made a statement which another party wants to introduce as hearsay. (2) The party who wants to challenge the credibility or consistency of that person must— (a) serve notice of intention to do so on— (i) the court officer, and (ii) the party who served the hearsay; and (b) in it, identify any statement or other material on which that party relies. (3) A respondent who wants to challenge such a person’s credibility or consistency must serve such a notice not more than 5 business days after service of the hearsay by the applicant. (4) An applicant who wants to challenge such a person’s credibility or consistency must serve such a notice not more than 3 business days after service of the hearsay by the respondent. (5) The party who served the hearsay— (a) may call that person to give oral evidence instead; and (b) if so, must serve notice of intention to do so on— (i) the court officer, and (ii) the other party as soon as practicable after service of the notice under paragraph (2). [Note. Section 5(2) of the Civil Evidence Act 1995 describes the procedure for challenging the credibility of the maker of a statement of which hearsay evidence is introduced. See also section 6 of that Act. The 1995 Act does not allow the introduction of evidence of a previous inconsistent statement otherwise than in accordance with sections 5, 6 and 7 of the Criminal Procedure Act 1865.]

One line that says what changes, such as "Halve the dog tax".

Who it helps, what it costs, what it fixes. It is what persuades people to support it.

How this law is officially changed

Solon does not know this law's official route yet. The proposal is recorded all the same, and the route appears here once its source is added.

A proposal here is not law. Support on Solon is evidence that people want the change; the official route says what it takes to make it law.

Sign in to file your proposal. What you have written stays on this page.

Sign in to file it

Think it through

Ask what your change would do, who would gain and who would bear a cost, and where something like it is already law. The assistant reads your draft as it stands, cites the law and the studies it finds, and takes no side. What you file stays yours.

Questions to start with
Think it through
Legal information from the published text, not advice for your case. Check the sources. Find a law · What the register holds