Federal Court of Australia
Federal Court of Australia
Greiss v Seven Network (Operations) Limited (Evidentiary Ruling) [2023] FCA 235 File number: NSD 292 of 2022
Judgment of: KATZMANN J
Date of judgment: 17 March 2023
Catchwords: EVIDENCE – admissibility – hearsay – business records exception – whether representations in witness statements taken by police were admissible as business records under s 69(2) of the Evidence Act 2005 (Cth) or whether s 69(2) does not apply because the representations were made in connection with an investigation relating to a criminal proceeding (s 69(3)(b)) – where certain representations were relevant for certain non-hearsay purposes, whether an order should be made under s 136 limiting the use to which the representations could be put to those purposes
Legislation: Evidence Act 1995 (Cth) ss 59, 60, 69, 135, 136
Cases cited: Ainsworth v Burden [2005] NSWCA 174 Australian Competition & Consumer Commission v Advanced Medical Institute (No 2) [2005] FCA 1357 Averkin v Insurance Australia Ltd (2017) 92 NSWLR 68 Bakerland Pty Ltd v Coleridge [2002] NSWCA 30 O'Grady v The Northern Queensland Company Ltd (1990) 169 CLR 356 Papakosmas v The Queen (1999) 196 CLR 297 Quick v Stoland Pty Ltd (1998) 87 FCR 371 Roach v Page (No 11) [2003] NSWSC 907 Seven Network Ltd v News Ltd (No 8) [2005] FCA 1348; (2005) 224 ALR 317
Division: General Division
Registry: New South Wales
National Practice Area: Other Federal Jurisdiction
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