Federal Court of Australia
Federal Court of Australia
Australian Building and Construction Commissioner v Albert [2021] FCA 168 File number(s): QUD 656 of 2019
Judgment of: COLLIER J
Date of judgment: 3 March 2021
Catchwords: EVIDENCE – whether paragraphs in affidavit referring to prior written statements of witness admissible – whether prior written statements annexed to affidavit admissible – evidence in chief – relevance of prior written statements – whether credibility evidence within meaning of s 101A Evidence Act 1995 (Cth) – whether s 32 Evidence Act relevant – s 37(3) Evidence Act considered - whether hearsay evidence
Legislation: Evidence Act 1995 (Cth)
Cases cited: Alfred v Lanscar (2007) 162 FCR 169; [2007] FCA 833 Australian Competition and Consumer Commission v Australian Institute of Professional Education Pty Ltd (No 2) [2018] FCA 1459 Humphries v The Queen (1987) 17 FCR 182 Spalla v St George Motor Finance Ltd [2004] FCA 470 Temple v Powell (No 1) (2007) FCA 987 Whittaker v Child Support Registrar [2010] FCA 43
Date of hearing: 2 March 2021
Registry: Queensland
Division: Fair Work Division
National Practice Area: Employment and Industrial Relations
Category: Catchwords
Number of paragraphs: 50
Counsel for the Applicant: Mr Y Shariff SC and Mr S Mackie
Solicitor for the Applicant: K & L Gates
Counsel for the Respondents Mr CW Dowling SC and Mr CA Massy
Solicitor for the Respondents Hall Payne Lawyers
ORDERS QUD 656 of 2019
BETWEEN: AUSTRALIAN BUILDING AND CONSTRUCTION COMMISSIONER Applicant
We try to embed the page this law was scraped from. If the site blocks framing, you still get the link and a local excerpt.
Last checked with source on —
Checking whether the official page can be embedded…
Plain-English simplify of this law: a short summary, key points, and both sides of the argument. Generated on first view via Replicate, then cached. Vote on what helps your study.
No study brief is cached for this law yet. Sign up to generate a plain-English brief.
Sign up to generate