is applicable to both civil and criminal cases alike. Evidence of similar facts can be adduced in civil cases. See the case of Hales v Ker [1908] 2 KB 601 . Here the Plaintiff sued the Defendant who is a barber for negligence in shaving him with an unsterilized razor thereby infecting him with ringworm. Evidence that the other persons shaved by the Defendant had contacted the same infection was held admissible. In an action for negligence for performing a surgical operation carelessly evidence that in other such operation, he had been negligent or skilful is inadmissible. See also the case of Hollingham v Head (1858). Here the issue was whether plaintiff contracted with the defendant subject to special terms. Evidence sought to be adduced was the fact of similar contracts with other persons, subject to these special terms. This was held inadmissible; the fact that a man (or a woman) has once or more in his life acted in a particular way does not make it probable that he or she so acted on a given occasion. Suppose P made the same contract D, Y, Z. The claim would probably have succeeded. The General Rule The general rule specifies the facts of which evidence may be given and it has its root in the Common law rule as examined and explained above. The Evidence Act stipulates that evidence may be given facts in issue and relevant facts and “of no others”. The court, in exercise of its discretion may exclude an otherwise relevant fact, if it considers; That the prejudicial tendency outweighs its probative value Evidence is obtained illegally or by some tricks Strict rules of admissibility would operate unfairly against an accused General evidence of similar facts is NOT admissible to prove the facts in issue. This assertion can be