REGINA v. PARK [1999] NSWSC 952

REGINA v. PARK [1999] NSWSC 952

The differences between the witness's prior account and current testimony were insufficiently material, and although the witness’s reluctance was evident, the exercise of discretion did not justify granting leave to cross-examine under s.38.

Parties
Crown: Regina; Accused: Sung Eun Park
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
16 September 1999
Procedural Posture
Criminal Trial / Application During Trial
Outcome
Application refused
Legal Topics
Cross Examination of Witness, Discretion to Grant Leave, Evidence Act 1995 S.38
Criminal Law Cross Examination of Witness Discretion to Grant Leave Evidence Act 1995 S.38

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 1 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Regina

Crown

Sung Eun Park

Accused

Procedural Posture

Criminal Trial / Application During Trial

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether leave should be granted to Crown to cross-examine witness under s.38 of Evidence Act 1995

Ratio Decidendi

The differences between the witness's prior account and current testimony were insufficiently material, and although the witness’s reluctance was evident, the exercise of discretion did not justify granting leave to cross-examine under s.38.

Court Disposition

Application refused

Orders

  • Leave to Crown to cross-examine witness under s.38 of Evidence Act 1995 is refused