Admissibility of evidence — lay opinion — relevance — false or misleading representations — Evidence Act 2006, ss 7, 8, 23-26, 27 & 28-30 — Reuben v R [2017] NZCA 138. The defendant company faced charges of making a series of false or misleading representations relating to the price of its products. It applied for the exclusion of evidence of statements made by the company's employees and solicitor, submitting that these statements amounted to inadmissible lay opinion as to what the defendant company and its employees subjectively intended by its advertising. The defendant submitted that the evidence was irrelevant, and therefore inadmissible pursuant to s 7 of the Evidence Act. Subsection 7(3) provides that evidence is relevant to a proceeding if it has a tendency to prove or disprove anything that is of consequence to the determination of the proceeding. The Judge accepted the prosecutor's submission that the statements were made by senior staff and the company's solicitor, all of whom were authorised to speak on behalf of the defendant company. The statements and admissions made were part of the factual matrix of the case and ought not to be truncated. The Judge deemed the evidence admissible pursuant to s 7 and dismissed the application to exclude the evidence. Judgment Date: 29 April 2021.