R v Agius; R v Castagna (No 2) [2017] NSWSC 1864

Supreme Court New South Wales

Medium Neutral Citation: R v Agius; R v Castagna (No 2) [2017] NSWSC 1864 Hearing dates: 27 November 2017 Decision date: 27 November 2017 Jurisdiction: Common Law - Criminal Before: Adamson J Decision: Documents admitted Catchwords: EVIDENCE – voir dire – objection taken to annual reports and accounts lodged with Companies House (UK) – alleged that provenance not established as documents downloaded from website – alleged unfairness as accused Agius was not shown to have prepared documents – HELD – documents admissible under s 69 of the Evidence Act 1995 (NSW) as business records – no occasion to limit their use under s 136 of Evidence Act Legislation Cited: Evidence Act 1995 (NSW), ss 69, 136, Dictionary Category: Procedural and other rulings Parties: Regina Robert Francis Agius (Accused) Anthony Dante Castagna (Accused) Representation: Counsel: P McGuire SC/A McGrath (Crown) P Lowe (Accused Agius) P Strickland SC/ S Callan/ S White SC

Solicitors: Commonwealth Director of Public Prosecutions (Crown) David H Cohen & Co (Accused Agius) Hazan Hollander Lawyers (Accused Castagna) File Number(s): 2016/136935; 2016/137095

Judgment: EX TEMPORE

Introduction: the nature of the objection 1. Objection is taken on behalf of the accused Mr Agius, for whom Mr Lowe appears, to a number of annual reports and accounts for Billbury Limited, beginning with the ones for the year ended 31 October 1997 and including the reports and accounts for subsequent years. Mr Lowe submitted, first, that the documents were not business records within the meaning of s 69 of the Evidence Act 1995 (NSW). In the alternative, he submitted that, I ought limit their use under s 136 of the Evidence Act.