R v Taleb (No 2) [2019] NSWSC 396

R v Taleb (No 2) [2019] NSWSC 396

Although the defence had not served Mr Trad's report until after the prosecution case closed and relevant propositions had not been put to Dr Shanahan, excluding otherwise admissible evidence would create substantial unfairness to Mr Taleb. Mr Trad's experience, studies and religious life qualified him to give opinion evidence on matters concerning the practice of Islam, but they did not qualify him to give general expert opinion evidence about the conflict in Syria or the practices of Islamic State, except where that evidence significantly overlapped with his expertise concerning Islam.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
10 April 2019
Procedural Posture
Criminal Trial / Procedural and Evidentiary Ruling on Voir Dire Concerning Admissibility of Proposed Defence Expert Evidence
Outcome
Mr Trad's evidence on the practice of Islam was admissible, but evidence relating to the conflict in Syria and the practices of Islamic State was inadmissible except for limited overlapping evidence.
Legal Topics
['expert Evidence' 'failure to Serve Expert Report' 'browne V Dunn' 'fairness to the Accused' 'islam' 'islamic State or Isis']
['criminal Law' 'evidence' 'criminal Procedure'] ['expert Evidence' 'failure to Serve Expert Report' 'browne V Dunn' 'fairness to the Accused' 'islam' 'islamic State or Isis']

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 and Evidentiary Ruling on Voir Dire Concerning Admissibility of Proposed Defence Expert Evidence

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether proposed expert evidence from Keysar Trad should be excluded because no report was served in accordance with the Criminal Procedure Act 1986.' 'Whether the accused should be prevented from calling evidence because relevant propositions were not put to prosecution expert Dr Rodger Shanahan in cross-examination.' 'Whether Mr Trad had the necessary expertise to give opinion evidence about the practice of Islam, the conflict in Syria and the practices of Islamic State or ISIS.']

Ratio Decidendi

Although the defence had not served Mr Trad's report until after the prosecution case closed and relevant propositions had not been put to Dr Shanahan, excluding otherwise admissible evidence would create substantial unfairness to Mr Taleb. Mr Trad's experience, studies and religious life qualified him to give opinion evidence on matters concerning the practice of Islam, but they did not qualify him to give general expert opinion evidence about the conflict in Syria or the practices of Islamic State, except where that evidence significantly overlapped with his expertise concerning Islam.

Court Disposition

Mr Trad's evidence on the practice of Islam was admissible, but evidence relating to the conflict in Syria and the practices of Islamic State was inadmissible except for limited overlapping evidence.

Orders

  • ["Mr Trad's evidence concerning the practice of Islam was allowed." "Most of Mr Trad's evidence touching on the conflict in Syria and the practices of Islamic State was disallowed." "Limited evidence was allowed where there was significant overlap between Mr Trad's evidence concerning Islam and his evidence...