TL v The KingCitation:[2022] HCA 35Before:Kiefel CJ, Gageler, Gordon, Steward, Gleeson JJDate:19 Oct 2022Case Number:S61/2022Read more

TL v The KingCitation:[2022] HCA 35Before:Kiefel CJ, Gageler, Gordon, Steward, Gleeson JJDate:19 Oct 2022Case Number:S61/2022Read more

Tendency evidence is admissible to prove identity where there is a narrow class of possible perpetrators and other evidence identifying the accused, even if the tendency evidence does not bear a close similarity to the offence, provided it has significant probative value.

Parties
Appellant: Appellant; Respondent: Respondent
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
19 October 2022
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Judgment
Outcome
Appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Tendency Evidence, Admissibility of Evidence, Identity of Offender
Evidence Law Criminal Law Tendency Evidence Admissibility of Evidence Identity of Offender

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 2 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Appellant

Appellant

Respondent

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal / Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the tendency evidence adduced to prove identity of the offender was admissible under s 97(1)(b) of the Evidence Act 1995 (NSW)
  2. 2 Whether the Court of Criminal Appeal misapplied principles in Hughes v The Queen (2017) 263 CLR 338
  3. 3 Whether tendency evidence required to bear close similarity to the offence

Ratio Decidendi

Tendency evidence is admissible to prove identity where there is a narrow class of possible perpetrators and other evidence identifying the accused, even if the tendency evidence does not bear a close similarity to the offence, provided it has significant probative value.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed

Orders

  • The appeal is dismissed.