The nature of re-examination

[9000] After cross-examination has ended, you can ask further question of your witness. This is re-examination. Its main purpose is to remove or to explain away or to qualify the damage done to the evidence in cross-examination. If the damage were not explained or at least qualified, there would be prejudice to the party's case or discredit to the witness. More particularly, re-examination is designed to repair any distortion or incomplete account or ambiguity that cross-examination has produced. If there has been no cross-examination there cannot be re-examination.

[9005] The aims of re-examination are:

1. To remove ambiguities or uncertainties.

2. To restore facts in issue.

3. To revive the credit of the witness.

Is it necessary?

[9010] Re-examination is one of the hardest of the advocate's tasks. Unlike examination-in-chief and cross-examination it cannot be planned. The ill-advised re-examination can bring your case horribly unstuck. In cross-examination the first decision to make is whether it is necessary. The same applies to re-examination. You will have taken instructions as fully as possible. You will have watched your witness closely during your opponent's cross-examination. You must make a decision in the running on whether you should re-examine.

[9015] The factors you will take into account are these:

1. Has cross-examination damaged your party's case either on the facts or on the credit of your witness? If not, no re-examination is necessary.

2. Are there ambiguities that need to be explained?

3. If your case is damaged, can you diffuse it? If you don't know how, and you re-examine, the damage may be increased.