REGINA v ELLIS [2003] NSWCCA 319

REGINA v ELLIS [2003] NSWCCA 319

The statutory provisions of the Evidence Act 1995 (NSW) comprehensively govern the admissibility of tendency and coincidence evidence, requiring a balancing exercise in which the evidence's probative value must substantially outweigh its prejudicial effect. Application of the prior common law test from Pfennig v The Queen is inconsistent with this statutory test. The trial judge was correct in applying the statutory language, and the evidence was properly admitted; the appeal is dismissed.

Parties
Respondent: Regina; Appellant: Darren Douglas Ellis
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
05 November 2003
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Court of Criminal Appeal Decision on Appeal Against Conviction
Outcome
Appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Tendency Evidence, Coincidence Evidence, Admissibility of Evidence, Statutory Interpretation, Test for Admissibility, Break and Enter Offences
Criminal Law Evidence Tendency Evidence Coincidence Evidence Admissibility of Evidence Statutory Interpretation Test for Admissibility Break and Enter Offences

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 33 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 9
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Regina

Respondent

Darren Douglas Ellis

Appellant

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal / Court of Criminal Appeal Decision on Appeal Against Conviction

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the trial judge applied the correct test for admissibility of tendency and coincidence evidence under the Evidence Act 1995 (NSW)
  2. 2 Whether the common law Pfennig test continues to apply after the enactment of the Evidence Act 1995 (NSW)
  3. 3 Whether evidence was rightly admitted as tendency and coincidence evidence

Ratio Decidendi

The statutory provisions of the Evidence Act 1995 (NSW) comprehensively govern the admissibility of tendency and coincidence evidence, requiring a balancing exercise in which the evidence's probative value must substantially outweigh its prejudicial effect. Application of the prior common law test from Pfennig v The Queen is inconsistent with this statutory test. The trial judge was correct in applying the statutory language, and the evidence was properly admitted; the appeal is dismissed.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed

Orders

  • Appeal dismissed