Federal Court of Australia
Federal Court of Australia
Miller v State of South Australia (Far West Coast Sea Claim) (No 3) [2022] FCA 466 File number: SAD 71 of 2016
Judgment of: CHARLESWORTH J
Date of judgment: 29 April 2022
Catchwords: EVIDENCE – hearsay – relevant evidence falling within the exclusionary hearsay rule in s 59 of the Evidence Act 1995 (Cth) – where the exception to the hearsay rule in s 60 of the Evidence Act applies – where respondent parties seek a ruling under s 136 of the Evidence Act to preclude the use of the evidence for a hearsay purpose – whether there is a danger that the respondents might be unfairly prejudiced if the ruling is not made – request denied
Legislation: Evidence Act 1995 (Cth) ss 56, 59, 60, 63, 67, 69, 72, 76, 77, 78, 79, 81, 136 Federal Court of Australia Act 1976 (Cth) s 37M
Cases cited: Bodney v Bennell (2008) 167 FCR 84 Dasreef Pty Ltd v Hawchar (2011) 243 CLR 588 Gumana v Northern Territory (2005) 141 FCR 457 Harrington-Smith v Western Australia (2003) 130 FCR 424 Honeysett v The Queen (2014) 253 CLR 122 Jango v Northern Territory of Australia (No 2) [2004] FCA 1004 Neowarra v Western Australia (No 1) (2003) 134 FCR 208 S Odgers, Uniform Evidence Law (16th ed, Law Book Co, 2021)
Division: General Division
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