R v Lu; R v Pham [2007] NSWSC 1141

R v Lu; R v Pham [2007] NSWSC 1141

The Court found that the risk of positive injustice to Pham from the admission of Lu's ERISP and related prejudicial material, combined with the evidence concerning Andrew Klintworth, created a real risk that could not be cured by jury directions, thus warranting separate trials. As to Lu, the evidence against him was not significantly weaker or different, and the prejudicial material was not highly prejudicial, so no real risk of injustice was found regarding him.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
16 July 2007
Procedural Posture
Criminal / Interlocutory Application for Separate Trials
Outcome
Order for separate trials
Legal Topics
['separate Trials' 'joint Criminal Enterprise' 'prejudicial Evidence' 'murder']
['criminal Law'] ['separate Trials' 'joint Criminal Enterprise' 'prejudicial Evidence' 'murder']

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 / Interlocutory Application for Separate Trials

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether there is a real risk of positive injustice to either accused if tried jointly' 'Whether separate trials should be ordered for Lu and Pham']

Ratio Decidendi

The Court found that the risk of positive injustice to Pham from the admission of Lu's ERISP and related prejudicial material, combined with the evidence concerning Andrew Klintworth, created a real risk that could not be cured by jury directions, thus warranting separate trials. As to Lu, the evidence against him was not significantly weaker or different, and the prejudicial material was not highly prejudicial, so no real risk of injustice was found regarding him.

Court Disposition

Order for separate trials

Orders

  • ['Lu and Pham be tried separately']