R v Qaumi & Ors (No 35) [2016] NSWSC 682

Supreme Court New South Wales

Medium Neutral Citation: R v Qaumi & Ors (No 35) [2016] NSWSC 682 Hearing dates: 30 May 2016 Date of orders: 31 May 2016 Decision date: 31 May 2016 Jurisdiction: Common Law - Criminal Before: Hamill J Decision: Uphold the objection raised by Witness M to answering questions that would disclose communications between her and her solicitor. Catchwords: CRIMINAL LAW – client legal privilege – requirement to advise witness of right to object – whether privilege lost by misconduct – whether privilege lost by voluntary disclose of evidence – lack of cogent evidence – objection upheld Legislation Cited: Evidence Act 1995 (NSW) Cases Cited: Attorney-General for the Northern Territory v Maurice & Ors (1986)161 CLR 475 Baker v Campbell [1983] HCA 39; (1983) 153 CLR 52 Grant v Downs [1986] HCA 80; (1976) 135 CLR 674 Mann v Carnell [1999] HCA 66; (1999) 201 CLR 1 Thomas v New South Wales [2006] NSWSC 3807 Category: Procedural and other rulings Parties: Regina Farhad Qaumi Mumtaz Qaumi Jamil Qaumi Mohammed Zarshoy Mohammed Kalal Representation: Counsel: K McKay & P Hogan (Crown) J Stratton SC & M Curry (F Qaumi) P Young SC (M Quami) N Carroll(J Quami) R Driels (Zarshoy) G Clarke (Kalal)

Solicitors: Solicitor for the NSW DPP(Crown) Archbold Legal (F Qaumi) George Sten& Co (M Quami) Bannisters Lawyers (J Quami) Zahr Lawyers (Zarshoy) Hallak Law (Kalal) File Number(s): Farhad Quami - 2014/6809; 2014/315201; 2014/315252Mumtaz Quami – 2014/6813; 2014/315251; 2014/315260Jamil Quami - 2013/336086; 2014/18164; 2014315253Mohammad Zarshoy – 2014/316236Mohammad Kalal - 2013/344739; 2014/66939 Publication restriction: No publication until the conclusion of the trial.