R v A2; R v KM; R v Vaziri (No. 12) [2015] NSWSC 1542

R v A2; R v KM; R v Vaziri (No. 12) [2015] NSWSC 1542

The evidence did not reach a state of unfavourability to warrant further leave under s.38 Evidence Act 1995; existing orders already allow sufficient scope for cross-examination within current grants of leave.

Parties
Crown: Regina; Accused: A2; Accused: KM; Accused: Shabbir Mohammedbhai Vaziri
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
13 October 2015
Procedural Posture
Criminal / Application for Further Leave to Cross Examine Under S.38 Evidence Act 1995
Outcome
Application refused
Legal Topics
Cross Examination, Unfavourable Witness, S.38 Evidence Act 1995
Criminal Law Cross Examination Unfavourable Witness S.38 Evidence Act 1995

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

Regina

Crown

A2

Accused

KM

Accused

Shabbir Mohammedbhai Vaziri

Accused

Procedural Posture

Criminal / Application for Further Leave to Cross Examine Under S.38 Evidence Act 1995

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether leave should be granted to the Crown to further cross-examine witness A3 on an additional topic under s.38 Evidence Act 1995

Ratio Decidendi

The evidence did not reach a state of unfavourability to warrant further leave under s.38 Evidence Act 1995; existing orders already allow sufficient scope for cross-examination within current grants of leave.

Court Disposition

Application refused

Orders

  • Application by the Crown for leave to cross-examine A3 on an additional topic under s.38 Evidence Act 1995 refused