Orr v Cobar Management Pty Ltd [2018] NSWDC 396

Orr v Cobar Management Pty Ltd [2018] NSWDC 396

MFI F was admissible as to the extracts put to witnesses because both parties to the conversations were called; MFI PP was admitted as the remaining training records; MFI QQ and MFI QQQ were relevant and necessary to understand evidence despite being tangential; MFI VV was admitted only to show applicable policies and investigators' knowledge of them; MFI RRR was rejected because disclosure deficiencies had already been established and the actual disclosed matters would not assist the court.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
14 December 2018
Procedural Posture
Criminal Evidentiary Ruling / Trial
Outcome
MFI F, MFI PP, MFI QQ, MFI VV and MFI QQQ admitted; tender of MFI RRR rejected.
Legal Topics
['documentary Evidence' 'tender of Documents' 'admissibility' 'disclosure' 'undue Waste of Time']
['evidence' 'criminal Procedure'] ['documentary Evidence' 'tender of Documents' 'admissibility' 'disclosure' 'undue Waste of Time']

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 Evidentiary Ruling / Trial

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether MFI F should be admitted as notes taken by Inspector Richards during the investigation.' 'Whether MFI PP should be admitted as a folder of training records for selected workers at the mine.' 'Whether MFI QQ should be excluded under section 135(c) of the Evidence Act 1995 or admitted as relevant to disclosure and reasonable practicability issues.' "Whether MFI VV should be admitted on a limited basis concerning the defendant's policies and investigators' knowledge of them." 'Whether MFI QQQ should be admitted as documents relating to Situation Reports prepared by Inspector Newey.' "Whether MFI RRR should be admitted as documents provided pursuant to the prosecutor's duty of disclosure."]

Ratio Decidendi

MFI F was admissible as to the extracts put to witnesses because both parties to the conversations were called; MFI PP was admitted as the remaining training records; MFI QQ and MFI QQQ were relevant and necessary to understand evidence despite being tangential; MFI VV was admitted only to show applicable policies and investigators' knowledge of them; MFI RRR was rejected because disclosure deficiencies had already been established and the actual disclosed matters would not assist the court.

Court Disposition

MFI F, MFI PP, MFI QQ, MFI VV and MFI QQQ admitted; tender of MFI RRR rejected.

Orders

  • ['MFI F is admitted as Exhibit 93.' 'MFI PP is admitted as Exhibit 94.' 'MFI QQ is admitted as Exhibit 95.' 'MFI VV is admitted as Exhibit 96.' 'MFI QQQ is admitted as Exhibit 97.' 'The tender of MFI RRR is rejected.']