R v A2; R v KM; R v Vaziri (No. 14) [2015] NSWSC 1544

R v A2; R v KM; R v Vaziri (No. 14) [2015] NSWSC 1544

Although some s.42(2)(a), (b) and (c) factors were live, the Court was not satisfied under s.42(3), particularly after the Crown's thorough cross-examination of A1 under s.38 on the relevant topics, that the facts concerned would be better ascertained if leading questions were not used by counsel for the Accused persons. No basis was demonstrated for making the order sought.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
15 October 2015
Procedural Posture
Criminal Proceeding / Crown Application Under S.42 Evidence Act 1995 to Preclude the Use of Leading Questions in Cross Examination of A1 on Certain Topics
Outcome
Crown application under s.42 Evidence Act 1995 refused.
Legal Topics
['leading Questions in Cross Examination' 'crown Cross Examination of Witness by Leave' 'evidence Act 1995 S.42' 'evidence Act 1995 S.38']
['criminal Law' 'evidence'] ['leading Questions in Cross Examination' 'crown Cross Examination of Witness by Leave' 'evidence Act 1995 S.42' '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 2 Party arguments 1 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Procedural Posture

Criminal Proceeding / Crown Application Under S.42 Evidence Act 1995 to Preclude the Use of Leading Questions in Cross Examination of A1 on Certain Topics

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether counsel for the Accused persons should be prevented under s.42 Evidence Act 1995 from using leading questions in cross-examination of A1 on four nominated topics.' 'Whether the facts concerned would be better ascertained if leading questions were not used in cross-examination of A1 by counsel for the Accused persons.']

Ratio Decidendi

Although some s.42(2)(a), (b) and (c) factors were live, the Court was not satisfied under s.42(3), particularly after the Crown's thorough cross-examination of A1 under s.38 on the relevant topics, that the facts concerned would be better ascertained if leading questions were not used by counsel for the Accused persons. No basis was demonstrated for making the order sought.

Court Disposition

Crown application under s.42 Evidence Act 1995 refused.

Orders

  • ['The Court declined to make an order under s.42 Evidence Act 1995 with respect to the topics identified by the Crown.']