R v Qaumi & Ors (No 47) [2016] NSWSC 1007

R v Qaumi & Ors (No 47) [2016] NSWSC 1007

The impugned portions of intercepted telephone calls constituted narrative statements of past events rather than communications in furtherance of a common purpose; they were inadmissible hearsay and not subject to any statutory exception, thus must be excluded.

Parties
Prosecution: Regina; Defendant: Farhad Qaumi; Defendant: Mumtaz Qaumi; Defendant: Jamil Qaumi; Defendant: Mohammed Zarshoy; Defendant: Mohammed Kalal
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
19 July 2016
Procedural Posture
Criminal / Trial (ruling on Admissibility of Evidence)
Outcome
evidence excluded
Legal Topics
Hearsay Evidence, Telephone Intercepts, Admissibility of Evidence
Criminal Law Evidence Hearsay Evidence Telephone Intercepts Admissibility of Evidence

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

Prosecution

Farhad Qaumi

Defendant

Mumtaz Qaumi

Defendant

Jamil Qaumi

Defendant

Mohammed Zarshoy

Defendant

Mohammed Kalal

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Criminal / Trial (ruling on Admissibility of Evidence)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether certain portions of telephone intercepts contain inadmissible hearsay as narrative statements of past events
  2. 2 Whether the evidence falls within an exception to the hearsay rule under sections 81 and 87 of the Evidence Act 1995 (NSW)

Ratio Decidendi

The impugned portions of intercepted telephone calls constituted narrative statements of past events rather than communications in furtherance of a common purpose; they were inadmissible hearsay and not subject to any statutory exception, thus must be excluded.

Court Disposition

evidence excluded

Orders

  • The evidence is excluded.
  • The recordings and associated transcripts should be edited before the material is presented to the jury.