Banjima People v State of Western Australia [2011] FCA 1454

FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA

Banjima People v State of Western Australia [2011] FCA 1454 Citation: Banjima People v State of Western Australia [2011] FCA 1454

Parties: DAWN HICKS, KEITH LETHBRIDGE, MAITLAND PARKER, TIMOTHY PARKER, CHARLIE SMITH, STEVEN SMITH, ALEC TUCKER AND ARCHIE TUCKER ON BEHALF OF THE BANJIMA PEOPLE v STATE OF WESTERN AUSTRALIA & ORS

File number: WAD 6069 of 1998

Judge: BARKER J

Date of judgment: 15 December 2011

Catchwords: EVIDENCE - question of whether restricted evidence taken for the purposes of determining whether to unrestrict prior restricted evidence should be admitted as evidence in the main proceeding - characterisation as "voir dire" evidence by the parties - Court not called upon to decide a preliminary question - evidence received as evidence in the trial - separate tender not required EVIDENCE - tender of affidavit evidence - documents included in a notice of documents to be tendered served by applicants on the respondents - whether admission of affidavits into evidence would unfairly prejudice the first respondent - danger of prejudice not so great as to substantially outweigh probative value

Legislation: Evidence Act 1995 (Cth) s 135, s 136, s 189

Cases cited: Amalgamated Television Services Pty Ltd v Marsden [2002] NSWCA 419 Australian Securities and Investments Commission v Rich [2004] NSWSC 1062; (2004) 51 ACSR 363; (2004) 213 ALR 338 Brown v Commissioner of Taxation [2002] FCA 318; (2002) 119 FCR 269 Casley-Smith v F S Evans & Sons Pty Ltd (No 2) (1988) 49 SASR 332 Dixon v McCarthy [1975] 1 NSWLR 617 Ex parte Whitelock; Re MacKenzie [1971] 2 NSWLR 534