R v Abdollahi (No 5) [2013] NSWSC 478

R v Abdollahi (No 5) [2013] NSWSC 478

Mr Tinline’s identification of Mr Feili was based on information supplied by a person whose identity and reliability could not be established; thus it was inadmissible hearsay and, in any event, excluded under s 137 Evidence Act due to unfair prejudice.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
11 February 2013
Procedural Posture
Criminal / Procedural Ruling on Admissibility of Evidence
Outcome
objection upheld; evidence excluded
Legal Topics
['admissibility of Hearsay Evidence' 'identification Evidence']
['criminal Law' 'evidence'] ['admissibility of Hearsay Evidence' 'identification Evidence']

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 / Procedural Ruling on Admissibility of Evidence

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether identification evidence based on hearsay is admissible under Evidence Act 1995 (NSW)' 'Whether the reliability of the identification can be assessed given the unknown source']

Ratio Decidendi

Mr Tinline’s identification of Mr Feili was based on information supplied by a person whose identity and reliability could not be established; thus it was inadmissible hearsay and, in any event, excluded under s 137 Evidence Act due to unfair prejudice.

Court Disposition

objection upheld; evidence excluded

Orders

  • ['The evidence of Mr Tinline identifying Mr Feili is excluded.']