R v Qaumi & Ors (No 4) [2016] NSWSC 114
The evidence of telephone conversations is excluded because, although relevant, its probative value is outweighed by the danger of unfair prejudice to the accused under s 137 Evidence Act 1995 (NSW).
- Parties
- Prosecution: Regina; Accused: Farhad Qaumi; Accused: Mumtaz Qaumi; Accused: Jamil Qaumi; Accused: Witness M; Accused: Mohammad Zarshoy; Accused: Mohammad Kalal
- Jurisdiction
- Australia
- Judgment Date
- 24 February 2016
- Procedural Posture
- Criminal / Evidentiary/interlocutory Ruling Prior to or During Trial
- Outcome
- Evidence excluded as inadmissible.
- Legal Topics
- Admissibility of Evidence, Probative Value, Danger of Unfair Prejudice, Telephone Intercepts, Exclusion of Evidence
Case Brief
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
Regina
Prosecution
Farhad Qaumi
Accused
Mumtaz Qaumi
Accused
Jamil Qaumi
Accused
Witness M
Accused
Mohammad Zarshoy
Accused
Mohammad Kalal
Accused
Procedural Posture
Criminal / Evidentiary/interlocutory Ruling Prior to or During Trial
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether evidence of telephone conversations between the accused and others is admissible
- 2 Whether the probative value of evidence is outweighed by the danger of unfair prejudice under s 137 Evidence Act 1995 (NSW)
Ratio Decidendi
The evidence of telephone conversations is excluded because, although relevant, its probative value is outweighed by the danger of unfair prejudice to the accused under s 137 Evidence Act 1995 (NSW).
Court Disposition
Evidence excluded as inadmissible.
Orders
- The evidence of telephone conversations between Mumtaz Qaumi, Mahmoud Atwa, Faisal Zarshoy and Farhad Qaumi on 11 April 2015 is inadmissible.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
Sign in to read
Sign in to read the full judgment text
Sign in to read the full judgment text. Downloads and additional research tools may depend on your plan.
Sign in to read the full judgment