. ▁v . ▁St arr . ▁ ▁Australia ▁The ▁rules ▁of ▁evidence ▁differ ▁among ▁the ▁states ▁and ▁the ▁Commonwealth ; ▁the ▁Commonwealth , ▁Victoria , ▁New ▁South ▁Wales , ▁Tas mania , ▁and ▁the ▁Australian ▁Capital ▁Territ ory ▁all ▁share ▁similar ▁he ars ay ▁prov isions ▁in ▁their ▁Un iform ▁Ev idence ▁Act s ; ▁the ▁other ▁states ▁rely ▁upon ▁the ▁common ▁law . ▁As ▁elsewhere , ▁he ars ay ▁is ▁usually ▁in ad miss ible , ▁outside ▁of ▁inter loc ut ory ▁proceed ings , ▁unless ▁it ▁falls ▁within ▁one ▁of ▁the ▁he ars ay ▁exceptions . ▁ ▁Un iform ▁Ev idence ▁Act ▁ ▁H ears ay ▁is ▁de alt ▁with ▁under ▁Part ▁ 3 · 2 . ▁There ▁are ▁several ▁local ▁peculiar ities ▁with ▁its ▁treatment . ▁s ▁ 5 9 ▁defines ▁the ▁' fact ' ▁of ▁a ▁he ars ay ▁statement ▁as ▁being ▁something ▁' that ▁it ▁can ▁reason ably ▁be ▁supposed ▁that ▁the ▁person ▁intended ▁to ▁assert ▁by ▁the ▁representation '. ▁H ears ay ▁rule ▁conf ines ▁the ▁potentially ▁broad ▁number ▁of ▁assert ions ▁it ▁might ▁cover ▁by ▁this ▁broad ▁definition ▁of ▁representation ▁to ▁only ▁intended ▁representations ▁ad du ced ▁to ▁prove ▁existence ▁of ▁the ▁assert ed ▁facts . ▁In ▁Lee ▁v ▁The ▁Queen , ▁ ▁the ▁term ▁' re presentation ' ▁was ▁used ▁to ▁apply ▁to ▁statements ▁and ▁to ▁conduct ▁and ▁was ▁used ▁to ▁en comp ass ▁all ▁those ▁statements ▁or ▁that ▁conduct ▁would ▁convey ▁to ▁the ▁observer . ▁ ▁The ▁extraordinary ▁s ▁ 6 0 ▁allows ▁a