Lowe v Lang [1999] NSWSC 801

Lowe v Lang [1999] NSWSC 801

The cross-examination of Mr Lowe amounted to a challenge that he had fabricated his account of the vital October conversation, so the proposed question in re-examination, designed to elicit prior consistent statements, arose from cross-examination and was admissible under the broad principles governing re-examination and under s 108(1) of the Evidence Act 1995 without leave.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
28 July 1999
Procedural Posture
Equity Proceedings; Evidentiary Ruling / Re Examination Objection During Hearing
Outcome
Question of re-examination allowed.
Legal Topics
['witnesses' 're Examination' 'credit' 'prior Consistent Statements' 'admissibility of Out of Court Statements']
['evidence'] ['witnesses' 're Examination' 'credit' 'prior Consistent Statements' 'admissibility of Out of Court Statements']

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

Equity Proceedings; Evidentiary Ruling / Re Examination Objection During Hearing

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether the plaintiff could be asked in re-examination whether, in the period from 30 October through November and December 1991, he told any person about the conversation or matters discussed with Barry Lang on 30 October 1991.' 'Whether a cross-examination challenge amounted to an assertion that the plaintiff fabricated his account of the October conversation.' 'Whether the proposed re-examination question was admissible under s 39 and s 108 of the Evidence Act 1995 notwithstanding s 105.']

Ratio Decidendi

The cross-examination of Mr Lowe amounted to a challenge that he had fabricated his account of the vital October conversation, so the proposed question in re-examination, designed to elicit prior consistent statements, arose from cross-examination and was admissible under the broad principles governing re-examination and under s 108(1) of the Evidence Act 1995 without leave.

Court Disposition

Question of re-examination allowed.

Orders

  • ['The question is allowed.']