ChooA (2012) Evidence. 3rd ed. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
2.
KeaneAMcKeownP (2012) The Modern Law of Evidence. 9th ed. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
3.
PinslerJ (2013a) Evidence and the Litigation Process. 4th ed. Singapore: LexisNexis.
4.
PinslerJ (2013b) Admissibility and the discretion to exclude evidence: in search of a systematic approach. Singapore Academy of Law Journal25: 215.
5.
PrasadPMMohanM (2013) Law of Evidence. 19th ed. Nagpur: LexisNexis Butterworths Wadhwa.
6.
Sek KeongC (1996) The criminal process—the Singapore model. Singapore Law Review17: 431.
7.
Singapore Law Reform Committee. (2007) Report of the Law Reform Committee on Reform of Admissibility of Hearsay Evidence in Civil Proceedings. Singapore: Singapore Law Reform Committee.
8.
Singapore Law Reform Committee (2011) Report of the Law Reform Committee on Opinion Evidence. Singapore: Singapore Law Reform Committee.
9.
SiyuanC (2012) The judicial discretion to exclude relevant evidence: perspectives from an Indian Evidence Act jurisdiction. International Journal of Evidence and Proof16(4): 398.
10.
SiyuanC (2013a) The 2012 amendments to Singapore’s Evidence Act: more questions than answers as regards expert opinion evidence?Statute Law Review34: 262.
11.
SiyuanC (2013b) The future of the similar fact rule in an Indian Evidence Act jurisdiction: Singapore. National University of Juridical Sciences Law Review6: 361.
12.
SiyuanC (2013c) Is the invocation of inherent jurisdiction the same as the exercise of inherent powers?International Journal of Evidence and Proof17(4): 367.
13.
SiyuanCPoonN (2012) Reliability and relevance as the touchstones for admissibility of evidence in criminal proceedings. Singapore Academy of Law Journal24: 535.
14.
StephenJF (1881) A Digest of the Law of Evidence. 4th ed. London: Macmillan and Co.
YihanG (2008) The jurisdiction to reopen criminal cases: a consideration of the (criminal) statutory and inherent jurisdiction of the Singapore Court of Appeal. Singapore Journal of Legal Studies395.
