Zaknic Pty Limited v Svelte Corporation Pty Limited, Harry Sialepis, Crypta Fuels Pty Limited and Robert Joseph Hagan Harry Sialepis (First Cross-Claimant) and Svelte Corporation Pty Limited (Second Cross-Claimant) v Crypta Fuels Pty Limited (First Cross

(1995) 140 ALR 701; [1995] FCA 1739

Federal Court of Australia

Built by Barristers,
For Australian Law.

See how it works

Interrogate

Catchwords

1. Evidence
2. › Admissibility
3. › Tendency evidence
4. › Civil proceedings
5. › Whether evidence of fraudulent acts in respect of other documents relevant to whether guarantee forged
6. › Whether significant probative value
7. › Evidence Act 1995 (Cth), ss 55, 97
1. Evidence
2. › Admissibility
3. › Discretionary exclusion
4. › Unfair prejudice and undue waste of time
5. › Complex evidence of peripheral relevance tendered at late stage of trial
6. › Evidence Act 1995 (Cth), s 135
1. Evidence
2. › Relevance
3. › Rational effect on assessment of probability
4. › Evidence of propensity to forge documents as bearing on probability of forgery of particular document
5. › Evidence Act 1995 (Cth), s 55

Quick Take

Pre-Act authorities requiring 'striking similarities', 'underlying unity', or 'a strong degree of probative force' and 'a real nexus between the evidence and the fact in issue' provide guidance on the meaning of 'significant probative value' in s 97 of the Evidence Act 1995 (Cth). Evidence of a general propensity to forge documents, without a cogent connection to the specific document in issue, will not satisfy the significant probative value threshold. Evidence excluded under the tendency rule may still be available for cross-examination as to credit.