R v David Qin [2007] NSWDC 321

R v David Qin [2007] NSWDC 321

It is in the interests of justice for the complainant to be cross-examined further, but only on matters not previously put to her during the initial trial, in accordance with s 306J(1)(c) and relevant evidentiary principles.

Parties
Prosecution: Crown; Accused: David Qin
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
07 December 2007
Procedural Posture
Criminal / Interlocutory Application During Subsequent Trial
Outcome
Application granted
Legal Topics
Cross Examination, Subsequent Trial, Evidence of Complainant
Criminal Law Criminal Procedure Cross Examination Subsequent Trial Evidence of Complainant

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 3 Authorities cited 3 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Crown

Prosecution

David Qin

Accused

Procedural Posture

Criminal / Interlocutory Application During Subsequent Trial

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether complainant should be subjected to further cross-examination in a subsequent trial under s 306J of the Criminal Procedure Act 1986

Ratio Decidendi

It is in the interests of justice for the complainant to be cross-examined further, but only on matters not previously put to her during the initial trial, in accordance with s 306J(1)(c) and relevant evidentiary principles.

Court Disposition

Application granted

Orders

  • Direct that the complainant be required to be subjected to further cross-examination, but not in respect of any matters in respect of which she has already been cross-examined.