R v A2; R v KM; R v Vaziri (No. 8) [2015] NSWSC 1472

R v A2; R v KM; R v Vaziri (No. 8) [2015] NSWSC 1472

The Crown demonstrated, through identified inconsistencies and unfavourable evidence from A1's pretrial testimony compared to his prior statements and recordings, that the threshold for leave to cross-examine under s.38 Evidence Act 1995 was met on five specified topics and credibility. However, the final grant of leave is to await A1's testimony at trial, at which point the Court will further consider the extent of cross-examination allowed, having regard to the relevant statutory discretionary factors.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
07 October 2015
Procedural Posture
Criminal / Advance Ruling on Application for Leave to Cross Examine Under S.38 Evidence Act 1995 Prior to Trial
Outcome
A foundation for leave to cross-examine A1 under s.38 Evidence Act 1995 is demonstrated, with final ruling to await evidence at trial.
Legal Topics
['evidence Law' 'cross Examination' 'unfavourable Witness' 'prior Inconsistent Statement' 'discretion Under Evidence Act S.192']
['criminal Law'] ['evidence Law' 'cross Examination' 'unfavourable Witness' 'prior Inconsistent Statement' 'discretion Under Evidence Act S.192']

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 / Advance Ruling on Application for Leave to Cross Examine Under S.38 Evidence Act 1995 Prior to Trial

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether the Crown should be granted leave under s.38 Evidence Act 1995 to cross-examine its own witness (A1) on specified topics due to unfavourable or inconsistent evidence.']

Ratio Decidendi

The Crown demonstrated, through identified inconsistencies and unfavourable evidence from A1's pretrial testimony compared to his prior statements and recordings, that the threshold for leave to cross-examine under s.38 Evidence Act 1995 was met on five specified topics and credibility. However, the final grant of leave is to await A1's testimony at trial, at which point the Court will further consider the extent of cross-examination allowed, having regard to the relevant statutory discretionary factors.

Court Disposition

A foundation for leave to cross-examine A1 under s.38 Evidence Act 1995 is demonstrated, with final ruling to await evidence at trial.

Orders

  • ["Prima facie leave to the Crown to cross-examine A1 on five nominated topics and credibility; the final grant of leave is reserved pending A1's evidence in-chief at trial and further submissions as necessary."]