60. Previous statements of witnesses
(1) The provisions of this Part as to hearsay evidence in proceedings apply equally (but with any necessary modifications) in relation to a previous statement made by a person called as a witness in the proceedings.
(2) A party who has called or intends to call a person as a witness in proceedings may not in those proceedings adduce evidence of a previous statement made by that person, except —
(a) with the leave of the Court; or
(b) for the purpose of rebutting a suggestion that his evidence has been fabricated.
This shall not be construed as preventing a witness statement (that is, a written statement of oral evidence which a party to the proceedings intends to lead) from being adopted by a witness in giving evidence or treated as his evidence.
(3) Where subsections (4), (5) or (6) apply, these Regulations do not authorise the adducing of evidence of a previous inconsistent or contradictory statement otherwise than in accordance with those subsections. This does not alter any provision made by court procedure rules under section 57 above (power to call witness for cross-examination on hearsay evidence).
(4) A party who has called, or intends to call, a person as a witness in proceedings —
(a) may not discredit him by general evidence of the witness' bad character; but
(b) may, if in the Court's opinion the witness shall, or is likely to, be hostile —
(i) contradict him by other evidence; or
(ii) with the leave of the Court, prove that the witness has previously made a statement which is inconsistent with his present testimony.
Before a party can give proof pursuant to sub-paragraph (b)(ii) —
(c) the circumstances of the supposed statement, sufficient to identify the particular occasion, must be mentioned to the witness; and
(d) the witness must be asked whether or not he made the statement.
(5) If a witness, upon cross-examination as to a previous statement made by him relative to the subject matter of the proceedings, and inconsistent with his present testimony, does not distinctly admit that he has made such statement, proof made be given that he did in fact make it; but before such proof can be given —
(a) the circumstances of the supposed statement, sufficient to identify the particular occasion, must be mentioned to the witness; and
(b) the witness must be asked whether or not he made the statement.
(6) A witness may be cross-examined as to previous statements made by him (whether in writing or orally and subsequently transcribed or otherwise reduced into writing), relative to the subject matter of the proceedings, without such writing being shown to him; but if the cross-examining party intends to use such writing to contradict the witness, the cross-examining party must, before such contradictory proof can be given, draw the witness' attention to those parts of the writing which are to be used for the purpose of contradicting him.
(7) Nothing in these Regulations affects any of the rules of law as to the circumstances in which, where a person called as a witness in proceedings is cross-examined on a document used by him to refresh his memory, that document may be made evidence in the proceedings.
(8) Nothing in this section shall be construed as preventing a statement of any description referred to above from being admissible by virtue of section 55 as evidence of the matter stated.