Is similar fact evidence admissible in a personal injury case?

In response, the respondents submit that similar fact evidence is admissible only in exceptional circumstances as it imposes considerable prejudice to the opposing party: see Farias v. Chung, 2005 HRTO 22 at para. 159. The respondents submit that similar fact evidence invariably impugns a party’s propensity or general disposition. They further submit that it risks wasting scarce judicial resources by sidetracking proceedings with irrelevant issues, or by leading to “fishing expeditions” for evidence that may well be irrelevant and inadmissible