NSW Caselaw
New South Wales Supreme Court
CITATION : LANDINI v. STATE OF NSW & ORS [2007] NSWSC 259
HEARING DATE(S) : 13 October 2006
JUDGMENT DATE : 22 March 2007
JURISDICTION : Common Law
JUDGMENT OF : Hall J at 1
DECISION : The statement of Mr Dent to Mr X cannot be admitted under s 87(1)(c) as an admission by Mr Donaldson
CATCHWORDS : Evidence Act 1995 (NSW), s.87(1)(c) - statement allegedly made by one police officer to another as to what allegedly said to the latter by a third officer - hearsay statement - whether admissible under s.87(1)(c) - when open to court to make finding as to the existence of a common puropse within that sub-section and as to whether first officer a party to such a common purpose - not open to find first officer a party to a common purpose - the statement made by first officer was not a representation in furtherance of a common purpose within s.87(1)(c) of the Act.
LEGISLATION CITED : Evidence Act 1995 (NSW)
Lee v Regina (1998) 195 CLR 594 R v Macraild (Dunford J, unreported 18.12.87) CASES CITED : Ahern v The Queen (1998) 165 CLR 87 Tripodi v The Queen (1961) 104 CLR 1 Daniel v Western Australia (2001) 186 ALR 369 Regina v Brownlee (1999) 105 A Crim R 214
PARTIES : LANDINI, Henry Charles v. STATE OF NSW & ORS
FILE NUMBER(S) : SC No. 20525 of 2002
P: C Steirn SC/P Barham/P Strain COUNSEL : 1D: J Maconachie QC/D Mallon 2D: A Katzmann SC/I Butcher 4D: P Strickland SC
P: Burn & Swift SOLICITORS : 1D: I V Knight 2D: Australian Government Solicitor 4D: Dibbs Barker Gosling
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