Chen v R [2018] NSWCCA 106

Chen v R [2018] NSWCCA 106

The appeal was dismissed because Ms Yang had specialised knowledge in translation and interpretation, applied to the Fuqing dialect through her training, study and professional experience, so her evidence was admissible under s 79. Her lack of awareness of the expert witness code of conduct and the challenges to her credibility, impartiality, reliability and accuracy did not make the evidence automatically inadmissible and did not require exclusion under ss 135 or 137, because the evidence was probative and the asserted weaknesses were matters for cross-examination, directions and jury assessment. The challenged Crown address concerning the translation of "la" did not establish reversible...

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
01 June 2018
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal Against Conviction / Appeal to the Court of Criminal Appeal From Conviction in the District Court of NSW
Outcome
Appeal dismissed.
Legal Topics
['expert Evidence' 'admissibility Under S 79 of the Evidence Act 1995 (nsw)' 'exclusion of Evidence Under Ss 135 and 137 of the Evidence Act 1995 (nsw)' 'expert Witness Code of Conduct' 'jury Directions' 'translation of Intercepted Telephone Calls' 'drug Supply']
['criminal Law' 'evidence' 'statutory Interpretation'] ['expert Evidence' 'admissibility Under S 79 of the Evidence Act 1995 (nsw)' 'exclusion of Evidence Under Ss 135 and 137 of the Evidence Act 1995 (nsw)' 'expert Witness Code of Conduct' 'jury Directions' 'translation of Intercepted Telephone Calls' 'drug Supply']

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 Appeal Against Conviction / Appeal to the Court of Criminal Appeal From Conviction in the District Court of NSW

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ["Whether the trial judge erred in ruling that Lara Yang's translation evidence was admissible under s 79 of the Evidence Act 1995 (NSW)." "Whether Lara Yang's evidence should have been excluded under s 135 or s 137 of the Evidence Act 1995 (NSW)." "Whether failure to comply with Part 75 r 3J of the Supreme Court Rules 1970 (NSW) required withdrawal or exclusion of Lara Yang's expert evidence." 'Whether the trial judge failed to give appropriate warnings or directions after the Crown address concerning the translation of the word "la" as "granule".']

Ratio Decidendi

The appeal was dismissed because Ms Yang had specialised knowledge in translation and interpretation, applied to the Fuqing dialect through her training, study and professional experience, so her evidence was admissible under s 79. Her lack of awareness of the expert witness code of conduct and the challenges to her credibility, impartiality, reliability and accuracy did not make the evidence automatically inadmissible and did not require exclusion under ss 135 or 137, because the evidence was probative and the asserted weaknesses were matters for cross-examination, directions and jury assessment. The challenged Crown address concerning the translation of "la" did not establish reversible...

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed.

Orders

  • ["Mr Chen's appeal is dismissed."]