NSW Caselaw
Reported Decision : 140 A Crim R 545
New South Wales Court of Criminal Appeal
CITATION : Regina v Kazzi; Regina v Williams; Regina v Murchie [2003] NSWCCA 241 HEARING DATE(S) : 28/08/03 JUDGMENT DATE : 28 August 2003
JUDGMENT OF : Ipp JA at 1; Grove J at 20; Dowd J at 21 DECISION : Order made by Robison DCJ, ruling that the statement of Vikram Gujral dated 13 May 2001 was not admissible in evidence, be vacated.
CATCHWORDS : EVIDENCE - CRIMINAL LAW - Evidence Act, s 65 - Whether trial judge erred in refusing to admit the evidence of a statement made by Crown witness - Whether witness was available to give evidence - Whether facts asserted in witness statement were fabricated - Whether respondent would sustain relevant prejudice were the statement to be admitted. Criminal Appeal Act 1912, s 5F LEGISLATION CITED : Criminal Procedure Act 1986, s 289 Evidence Act 1995, s 65 Regina v Joseph John Kazzi PARTIES : Regina v Mark Raydon Williams Regina v Richard Alan Murchie FILE NUMBER(S) : CCA 60300/03; 60301/03; 60302/03 COUNSEL : D C Frearson (Crown) R Hulme SC (Respondents) SOLICITORS : S E O'Connor (Crown) Neil J O'Connor & Associates (Respondents)
LOWER COURT District Court JURISDICTION : LOWER COURT 01/11/1067; 01/11/0989; 01/11/1007 FILE NUMBER(S) : LOWER COURT Robison DCJ JUDICIAL OFFICER :
IN THE COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEAL 60300/03 60301/03 60302/03
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