Phillips v The Queen [1985] HCA 79

Phillips v The Queen [1985] HCA 79

Where imputations on the character of a prosecution witness are made as part of the defence, a trial judge retains a wide, unfettered discretion whether to permit cross-examination of the accused on prior convictions. This discretion must be exercised judicially to secure a fair trial, weighing all relevant considerations including the nature of the imputations, the potential prejudice to the accused, and the interests of justice. In this case, the majority found no error in the trial judge's exercise of discretion; Deane J, dissenting, considered that the record showed undue prejudice and insufficient justification for allowing cross-examination on convictions and would have quashed the...

Jurisdiction
Australia
Procedural Posture
Criminal / Application for Special Leave to Appeal and Appeal
Outcome
special leave to appeal granted; appeal dismissed (majority); Deane J dissenting would have quashed convictions and ordered retrial
Legal Topics
['cross Examination' 'admissibility of Prior Convictions' 'judicial Discretion' 'fair Trial' 'imputations on Character']
['criminal Law' 'evidence'] ['cross Examination' 'admissibility of Prior Convictions' 'judicial Discretion' 'fair Trial' 'imputations on Character']

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

Criminal / Application for Special Leave to Appeal and Appeal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ["Whether the trial judge wrongly exercised discretion under s. 15(2)(c) of the Evidence Act 1977 (Qld) in permitting the applicant to be cross-examined about previous convictions due to imputations on the complainant's character." 'What principles govern the exercise of that discretion.']

Ratio Decidendi

Where imputations on the character of a prosecution witness are made as part of the defence, a trial judge retains a wide, unfettered discretion whether to permit cross-examination of the accused on prior convictions. This discretion must be exercised judicially to secure a fair trial, weighing all relevant considerations including the nature of the imputations, the potential prejudice to the accused, and the interests of justice. In this case, the majority found no error in the trial judge's exercise of discretion; Deane J, dissenting, considered that the record showed undue prejudice and insufficient justification for allowing cross-examination on convictions and would have quashed the...

Court Disposition

special leave to appeal granted; appeal dismissed (majority); Deane J dissenting would have quashed convictions and ordered retrial

Orders

  • ['Special leave to appeal granted.' 'Appeal dismissed.']