Hamod v State of New South Wales (No 10) [2008] NSWSC 611

New South Wales Supreme Court

CITATION : Hamod v State of New South Wales (No 10) [2008] NSWSC 611

HEARING DATE(S) : 17 June 2008

JUDGMENT DATE : 18 June 2008

JUDGMENT OF : Harrison J

DECISION : 1. Pursuant to s 136 Evidence Act 1995 I limit Exhibits AU to AAAK inclusive in accordance with the terms of the usual document limitation. 2. I reject the tender of the whole of the transcript of the proceedings before Magistrate Horler in the Local Court.

CATCHWORDS : EVIDENCE – s 136 Evidence Act 1995 – application by a defendant to limit the use to be made of evidence potentially unfairly prejudicial to that defendant – documents admitted only as evidence of their contents and not as evidence of their truth - EVIDENCE – criminal proceedings in Local Court – proceedings against present plaintiff as defendant dismissed – application by plaintiffs to tender transcript of proceedings in claim for malicious prosecution – no particular portion of transcript identified by plaintiffs as relevant to a fact in issue – tender rejected

LEGISLATION CITED : Civil Procedure Act 2005 Evidence Act 1995

CATEGORY : Procedural and other rulings

A v New South Wales [2007] HCA 10 Commonwealth v Griffiths [2007] NSWCA 370; (2007) 245 ALR 172 D'Orta-Ekenaike v Victoria Legal Aid [2005] HCA 12; (2005) 223 CLR 1 CASES CITED : Jamieson v The Queen [1993] HCA 48; (1993) 177 CLR 574 R v Beydoun (1990) 22 NSWLR 256 Ringrow Pty Ltd v BP Australia Limited [2003] FCA 933 Roach v Page (No 11) [2003] NSWSC 907 Young v Coupe [2004] NSWSC 546

Anthony Hamod (First Plaintiff) PARTIES : Hamock Investments Pty Ltd (Second Plaintiff) State of New South Wales (First Defendant) UBS Australia Limited (Second Defendant)