NSW Caselaw
Supreme Court New South Wales
Medium Neutral Citation: R v Al Batat & Ors (No 8) [2020] NSWSC 1095 Hearing dates: 18 August 2020 Date of orders: 18 August 2020 Decision date: 18 August 2020 Jurisdiction: Common Law Before: Hamill J Decision: (1) The evidence in paragraph [99] of Wai Li's statement dated 1 May 2019 is admissible in Mr Luo's case. Catchwords: CRIMINAL LAW – evidence - whether hearsay - where statements attributes shooting to co-accused - where shooting took place at makeshift Buddhist temple - whether statement may be second hand hearsay - notice to admit facts - where accused admits presence at the scene in response to notice - evidence admissible Legislation Cited: Evidence Act 1995 (NSW), ss 81, 88 Category: Procedural and other rulings Parties: Regina Abdallah Hassan Al Batat Ying Cheng Luo Ian Fan Jaiyu Liu Jacob Blake Bayliss Nai An Li Representation: Counsel: P Hogan (Crown) B Rigg SC (Al Batat) R Webb (Luo) T Quilter (Fan) N Carroll (Liu) A Norrie (Bayliss) D Carroll (Li)
Solicitors: Solicitor for the NSW DPP (Crown) TS Law Firm (Al Batat) Voros Lawyers (Luo) Zahr & Partners (Fan) George Sten & Co (Liu) Ross Hill Lawyers (Bayliss) Younes & Espiner (Li) File Number(s): 2018/242293; 2018/214586 (Al Batat) 2017/170943; 2018/380808 (Luo) 2017/168582 (Fan) 2017/168476 (Liu) 2017/321618 (Bayliss) 2018/214894 (Li) Publication restriction: No publication until conclusion of trial
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