LANDINI v. STATE OF NSW & ORS [2007] NSWSC 259

LANDINI v. STATE OF NSW & ORS [2007] NSWSC 259

The alleged statement by Mr Dent to Mr X was not admissible under s.87(1)(c) as an admission by Mr Donaldson because it was not reasonably open on the evidence to find that Mr Dent was a party to a relevant common purpose with a party to the proceedings at the time the statement was made, and the statement was not shown to have been made in furtherance of any such common purpose.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
22 March 2007
Procedural Posture
Common Law Proceeding; Judgment on Admissibility of Evidence / Ruling on Admissibility of Evidence
Outcome
The statement of Mr Dent to Mr X cannot be admitted under s.87(1)(c) as an admission by Mr Donaldson; the Court declined to reconsider the previous provisional admission of the evidence for a non-hearsay purpose.
Legal Topics
['evidence Act 1995 (nsw) S.87(1)(c)' 'admissions' 'hearsay' 'common Purpose' 'co Conspirator Representations' 'non Hearsay Purpose' 'provisional Relevance']
['evidence Law'] ['evidence Act 1995 (nsw) S.87(1)(c)' 'admissions' 'hearsay' 'common Purpose' 'co Conspirator Representations' 'non Hearsay Purpose' 'provisional Relevance']

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

Common Law Proceeding; Judgment on Admissibility of Evidence / Ruling on Admissibility of Evidence

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ["Whether Mr Dent's alleged statement to Mr X could be admitted under s.87(1)(c) of the Evidence Act 1995 (NSW) as an admission by Mr Donaldson." 'Whether it was reasonably open to find that Mr Dent made the representation in furtherance of a common purpose with a party to the proceedings.' 'Whether the evidence admitted provisionally for a non-hearsay purpose should be reconsidered or limited under s.136 of the Evidence Act.']

Ratio Decidendi

The alleged statement by Mr Dent to Mr X was not admissible under s.87(1)(c) as an admission by Mr Donaldson because it was not reasonably open on the evidence to find that Mr Dent was a party to a relevant common purpose with a party to the proceedings at the time the statement was made, and the statement was not shown to have been made in furtherance of any such common purpose.

Court Disposition

The statement of Mr Dent to Mr X cannot be admitted under s.87(1)(c) as an admission by Mr Donaldson; the Court declined to reconsider the previous provisional admission of the evidence for a non-hearsay purpose.

Orders

  • ['The statement of Mr Dent to Mr X cannot be admitted under s.87(1)(c) as an admission by Mr Donaldson.' "The Court declined to reconsider the previous ruling admitting Mr X's evidence on the limited basis on which it had been admitted." "The second defendant's application under s.136 of the Evidence Act did not...