R v Xie (No 15) [2015] NSWSC 2126

R v Xie (No 15) [2015] NSWSC 2126

After Mrs Lin received further advice and confirmed that she would not object under s 18, it was unnecessary to determine whether she should be required to give evidence despite an objection. However, in all the circumstances, including that her evidence was relied upon by the accused, included an alibi, was important to the trial, and there was no evidence of harm to Mrs Lin or damage to her relationship with the accused, the Court saw no reason why it would not have required her to give evidence had she objected.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
23 June 2015
Procedural Posture
Criminal Trial / Procedural Ruling During Cross Examination Concerning S 18 of the Evidence Act 1995 (nsw)
Outcome
Witness would have been required to give evidence were objection taken.
Legal Topics
['compellability of Spouse' 'objection to Giving Evidence for the Prosecution' 'evidence Act 1995 (nsw) S 18']
['criminal Law' 'evidence'] ['compellability of Spouse' 'objection to Giving Evidence for the Prosecution' 'evidence Act 1995 (nsw) S 18']

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 Trial / Procedural Ruling During Cross Examination Concerning S 18 of the Evidence Act 1995 (nsw)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether the Court was satisfied that Mrs Lin was aware of her entitlement to object to giving evidence as a witness for the prosecution under s 18 of the Evidence Act 1995 (NSW).' 'Whether Mrs Lin would have been required to give evidence if she had objected under s 18.']

Ratio Decidendi

After Mrs Lin received further advice and confirmed that she would not object under s 18, it was unnecessary to determine whether she should be required to give evidence despite an objection. However, in all the circumstances, including that her evidence was relied upon by the accused, included an alibi, was important to the trial, and there was no evidence of harm to Mrs Lin or damage to her relationship with the accused, the Court saw no reason why it would not have required her to give evidence had she objected.

Court Disposition

Witness would have been required to give evidence were objection taken.

Orders

  • ['Mrs Lin indicated that she would not take the objection under s 18 and would continue to give her evidence.']