The Larrakia People v Northern Territory [2003] FCA 1175

The Larrakia People v Northern Territory [2003] FCA 1175

The probative value of Professor Morphy’s evidence is substantially outweighed by the danger of unfair prejudice to the respondents, particularly owing to lateness and lack of opportunity for preparation and cross-examination; accordingly, the evidence is refused under s 135 of the Evidence Act, but may be admitted for the limited purpose under s 136 as material for cross-examination of the (now deceased) Professor Maddock.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
17 September 2003
Procedural Posture
Application for Determination of Native Title / Ruling on Admissibility of Expert Evidence
Outcome
Application to admit the evidence of Professor Morphy in general refused; admitted for a limited purpose only under s 136 of the Evidence Act.
Legal Topics
['admissibility of Expert Evidence' 'discretion to Exclude Evidence' 'unfair Prejudice Under Evidence Act 1995 (cth) S 135' 'limiting Use of Evidence Under Evidence Act 1995 (cth) S 136']
['evidence Law' 'native Title'] ['admissibility of Expert Evidence' 'discretion to Exclude Evidence' 'unfair Prejudice Under Evidence Act 1995 (cth) S 135' 'limiting Use of Evidence Under Evidence Act 1995 (cth) S 136']

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 1 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Procedural Posture

Application for Determination of Native Title / Ruling on Admissibility of Expert Evidence

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether the report of Professor Morphy should be admitted as evidence under s 135 of the Evidence Act 1995 (Cth)' "Whether the use of Professor Morphy's evidence should be limited under s 136 of the Evidence Act 1995 (Cth)"]

Ratio Decidendi

The probative value of Professor Morphy’s evidence is substantially outweighed by the danger of unfair prejudice to the respondents, particularly owing to lateness and lack of opportunity for preparation and cross-examination; accordingly, the evidence is refused under s 135 of the Evidence Act, but may be admitted for the limited purpose under s 136 as material for cross-examination of the (now deceased) Professor Maddock.

Court Disposition

Application to admit the evidence of Professor Morphy in general refused; admitted for a limited purpose only under s 136 of the Evidence Act.

Orders

  • ['The evidence of Professor Morphy in his report of September 2003 is refused generally in the proceeding.' 'The report may be admitted for the limited purpose of being material available to the first applicants from a qualified anthropologist which may have been put to Professor Maddock in cross-examination had he...