TL v The King [2022] HCA 35

TL v The King [2022] HCA 35

The threshold of significant probative value for admissibility of tendency evidence is capable of being met without a requirement for close similarity when identity evidence includes other strong indicators (such as opportunity restricted to a narrow group). In this case, the asserted tendency to deliberately inflict serious physical harm upon the victim, in light of other evidence identifying the appellant and tending to exclude other possible perpetrators, meets that threshold under s 97(1)(b) of the Evidence Act 1995 (NSW). The Court of Criminal Appeal was correct to admit the tendency evidence.

Parties
Appellant: TL; Respondent: The King
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
19 October 2022
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Final Appeal, High Court of Australia
Outcome
Appeal dismissed.
Legal Topics
Admissibility of Tendency Evidence, Probative Value, Proof of Identity, Application of Evidence Act 1995 (nsw) S 97(1)(b), Application of Hughes V the Queen Principles
Criminal Law Evidence Admissibility of Tendency Evidence Probative Value Proof of Identity Application of Evidence Act 1995 (nsw) S 97(1)(b) Application of Hughes V the Queen Principles

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 4 Authorities cited 22 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

TL

Appellant

The King

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal / Final Appeal, High Court of Australia

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Court of Criminal Appeal misapplied principles in Hughes v The Queen (2017) 263 CLR 338 on admissibility of tendency evidence to prove identity under s 97(1)(b) of the Evidence Act 1995 (NSW)
  2. 2 Whether close similarity is required between the conduct evidencing the tendency and the charged offence where tendency evidence is adduced to prove identity
  3. 3 Whether the tendency evidence had significant probative value as required by s 97(1)(b)

Ratio Decidendi

The threshold of significant probative value for admissibility of tendency evidence is capable of being met without a requirement for close similarity when identity evidence includes other strong indicators (such as opportunity restricted to a narrow group). In this case, the asserted tendency to deliberately inflict serious physical harm upon the victim, in light of other evidence identifying the appellant and tending to exclude other possible perpetrators, meets that threshold under s 97(1)(b) of the Evidence Act 1995 (NSW). The Court of Criminal Appeal was correct to admit the tendency evidence.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed.

Orders

  • Appeal dismissed.