R v Abdallah (No. 3) [2014] NSWSC 267

R v Abdallah (No. 3) [2014] NSWSC 267

Since the expert agreement (MFI 12) was not an agreement between the parties as per s 191, its contents did not bind the parties, and there is no basis to exclude the evidence objected to. The evidence was relevant and not unfairly prejudicial.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
26 February 2014
Procedural Posture
Criminal / Interlocutory Application on Evidentiary Objection
Outcome
Objection overruled. Evidence admissible.
Legal Topics
['admissibility of Expert Evidence' 'exclusion of Evidence' 'judicial Discretion Under Evidence Act']
['criminal Law' 'evidence'] ['admissibility of Expert Evidence' 'exclusion of Evidence' 'judicial Discretion Under Evidence Act']

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

Criminal / Interlocutory Application on Evidentiary Objection

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether expert evidence may be led that potentially contradicts an agreement between experts in a criminal trial' 'Whether Crown is bound by an expert agreement not adopted by the parties under s 191 Evidence Act 1995 (NSW)' 'Whether the evidence should be excluded under s 137 of the Evidence Act 1995 (NSW)']

Ratio Decidendi

Since the expert agreement (MFI 12) was not an agreement between the parties as per s 191, its contents did not bind the parties, and there is no basis to exclude the evidence objected to. The evidence was relevant and not unfairly prejudicial.

Court Disposition

Objection overruled. Evidence admissible.

Orders

  • ['The prosecution may proceed to elicit the contested expert evidence, subject to individual objections on form or content.']