R (Cth) v Petroulias (No. 29) [2007] NSWSC 1005

R (Cth) v Petroulias (No. 29) [2007] NSWSC 1005

The court was satisfied that Mr Aivaliotes gave evidence unfavourable to the Crown and/or made prior inconsistent statements on seven specified topics, thus meeting the requirements of s.38(1)(a) and (c). Having considered all discretionary factors, including fairness, importance, and risk of prejudice, leave was granted to the Crown under s.38 Evidence Act 1995 to question Mr Aivaliotes, as though cross-examining, about evidence given concerning Topics 1, 2, 3, 5, 6, 7 and 9.

Parties
Crown: Regina (Commonwealth); Accused: Nikytas Nicholas Petroulias
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
06 September 2007
Procedural Posture
Criminal / Interlocutory Application (leave to Cross Examine)
Outcome
Leave granted to the Crown under s.38 Evidence Act 1995 to cross-examine its witness, Emmanuel Dimitrios Aivaliotes, about evidence given concerning Topics 1, 2, 3, 5, 6, 7 and 9.
Legal Topics
Hostile Witness, Cross Examination, Prior Inconsistent Statements, Evidence Act 1995 S.38, Discretionary Factors in Grant of Leave
Criminal Law Hostile Witness Cross Examination Prior Inconsistent Statements Evidence Act 1995 S.38 Discretionary Factors in Grant of Leave

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 5 Authorities cited 10 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Regina (Commonwealth)

Crown

Nikytas Nicholas Petroulias

Accused

Procedural Posture

Criminal / Interlocutory Application (leave to Cross Examine)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Crown should be granted leave under s.38 Evidence Act 1995 to question its own witness, Mr Aivaliotes, as though cross-examining, on evidence given about specified topics

Ratio Decidendi

The court was satisfied that Mr Aivaliotes gave evidence unfavourable to the Crown and/or made prior inconsistent statements on seven specified topics, thus meeting the requirements of s.38(1)(a) and (c). Having considered all discretionary factors, including fairness, importance, and risk of prejudice, leave was granted to the Crown under s.38 Evidence Act 1995 to question Mr Aivaliotes, as though cross-examining, about evidence given concerning Topics 1, 2, 3, 5, 6, 7 and 9.

Court Disposition

Leave granted to the Crown under s.38 Evidence Act 1995 to cross-examine its witness, Emmanuel Dimitrios Aivaliotes, about evidence given concerning Topics 1, 2, 3, 5, 6, 7 and 9.

Orders

  • Leave under s.38 Evidence Act 1995 is granted to the Crown to question Emmanuel Dimitrios Aivaliotes as though cross-examining concerning specified topics 1, 2, 3, 5, 6, 7 and 9.