Supreme Court New South Wales Medium Neutral Citation: Chaina v Presbyterian Church (NSW) Property Trust (No. 22) [2013] NSWSC 1707 Hearing dates: 12 November 2013 Decision date: 12 November 2013 Jurisdiction: Common Law Before: Davies J Decision: MFIs 34 to 43 should be admitted into evidence. Catchwords: EVIDENCE - admissibility - documents shown to witness in cross-examination and marked for identification - expert witness provides opinion on documents and cross-examination - documents admissible Category: Interlocutory applications Parties: Mathew Chaina (First Plaintiff) and ors Presbyterian Church (NSW) Property Trust (First Defendant) and ors Representation: Counsel: In person (Plaintiffs) R Stitt QC, G L Turner & H Stitt (Defendants) Solicitors: In person (Plaintiffs) Curwoods Lawyers (Defendants) File Number(s): 2002/69354 Judgment 1MFIs 34 to 39 were shown to Mr Chaina during his cross-examination. He said he recognised them as infrared spectrum analysis graphs, but he said he was not able to interpret those graphs or to interpret them without what he called a reference (see T 1000ff). 2MFI 40 was a two page document written by Mr Chaina whilst in the witness box setting out what he said he did when he reverse engineered a laundry powder. 3MFIS 41 to 43 were graphs described as Mass Spectrum, Nuclear Magnetic Spectroscopy and Infrared Spectrum graph. They were shown to Mr Chaina during his cross-examination and he was asked questions about them. 4Those MFIs were provided to Dr McDonald with a copy of the cross-examination of Mr Chaina in relation thereto. That has enabled Dr McDonald to draw various conclusions concerning the extent of Mr Chaina's knowledge, a matter which goes to an issue in this case, namely the likelihood that he could have prepared the formulae that he claims to have done in the way that he claims to have done it. 5In those circumstances, those MFIs appear to me to be clearly relevant to an issue and to be admissible. They will be marked Exhibits 226 to 235 respectively. ********** Amendments 20 November 2013 - Paragraphs 2 and 3 added Amended paragraphs: 1, 2 and 3 DISCLAIMER - Every effort has been made to comply with suppression orders or statutory provisions prohibiting publication that may apply to this judgment or decision. The onus remains on any person using material in the judgment or decision to ensure that the intended use of that material does not breach any such order or provision. Further enquiries may be directed to the Registry of the Court or Tribunal in which it was generated. Decision last updated: 20 November 2013