§ SECTION 18 · BSA 2023 · CHAPTER II — RELEVANCY OF FACTS

Admissions by persons expressly referred to by party to suit

The last of the speaker rules — and the shortest: say “go and ask him” on the disputed matter, and his answer becomes your admission.

How to read Section 18

One sentence, one famous horse.

What it is about

A party who expressly refers the other side to a third person for information adopts that person’s answer as his own admission.

Two conditions

The reference must be express — and it must be on the matter in dispute.

The logic

You vouched for the referee — the law holds you to your chosen source of truth, whichever way the answer falls.

The bare Act

The section in its own words — colour-keyed by what each phrase does.

Section 18 · verbatim

Statements made by persons to whom a party to the suit has expressly referred for information in reference to a matter in dispute are admissions.

Illustration

The question is, whether a horse sold by A to B is sound.

A says to B—“Go and ask C, C knows all about it”. C’s statement is an admission.

In short: point to a person as your source of truth on the disputed matter, and the law treats his words as yours — the express referral is the whole trigger.

→ With this, the WHO of admissions is complete: the party (§ 16), his agent (§ 16), the time-locked special speakers (§ 16(2)), the outside voice on a provable position (§ 17) — and the chosen oracle (§ 18).

Glossary

expressly referred

A clear pointing — “ask him”, “he will tell you” — not a casual mention.

matter in dispute

The referral must concern the contested question itself.

the referee

The person pointed to — C in the illustration; his answer travels back as the party’s admission.

binds the referrer

Only the party who pointed is bound — the choice was his.

vouching

The section’s logic: naming your oracle is warranting his answer.

The picture

The referral loop.

The section, part by part

Tap a part — the picture-story tells it first; the word-by-word text and example follow.

The ruleThe Illustration

the ruleYou chose the oracle — you own the answer

In one lineWhen a party expressly says “ask him” on the disputed matter, that person’s answer becomes the party’s own admission.

Statements made by persons to whom a party to the suit has expressly referredthe referralthe party himself pointed: “ask him” — and the reference must be express.

for information in reference to a matter in disputethe scopethe pointing must concern the disputed matter — not life at large.

are admissions.the resultthe referee’s answer binds the party who pointed — as if he had said it himself.

ExampleA dispute over a botched paint job: the contractor says “ask the painter who applied it — he’ll tell you”. The painter’s verdict — “the surface was never primed” — now binds the contractor who pointed to him.

✗ Not thisThe reference must be express and on the matter in dispute: a casual “C knows him well” is not a referral. And the answer binds only the referrer — not the other side, who never chose the oracle.

IllustrationThe horse and the chosen referee

In one line“Is the horse sound?” — A says “ask C”. Whatever C says, A owns it.

the salethe disputeA sold B a horse; the question is whether it was sound.

“Go and ask C, C knows all about it”the referralA expressly sent B to C on that very question — so C’s statement is A’s admission.

ExampleThe logic is estoppel-flavoured: by choosing C as the source of truth, A vouched for him — the law simply holds A to his choice, whichever way C’s answer goes.

Connected provisions

§ 16

Party & agent

The main speaker rules — § 18 completes their list with the chosen oracle.

§ 17

Position must be proved

The other borrowed voice — there by necessity, here by the party’s own choice.

§ 19 · next

Proving admissions

Against whom — and on whose behalf — admissions may be proved.

lineage

IEA 1872, § 20

This provision carries forward section 20 of the repealed Evidence Act.