Simon-Beecroft v Proprietors "Top of the Mark" BUP No 3410 & Anor

[1996] QCA 239

Queensland Court of Appeal

Built by Barristers,
For Australian Law.

See how it works

Interrogate

Catchwords

1. Evidence
2. › Prior inconsistent statements
3. › Admissibility as evidence of facts stated
4. › Statement by witness to third party proving admission by party
5. › Whether prior inconsistent statement proved under s 18 admissible under s 101 as evidence of admission
6. › Weight to be given under s 102
7. › Evidence Act 1977 (Qld), ss 18, 98, 101, 102
1. Appeal
2. › New trial
3. › Fresh evidence
4. › Whether evidence could have been obtained with reasonable diligence before trial
5. › Whether evidence sufficiently credible
6. › Whether real possibility of opposite result
1. Evidence
2. › Credibility
3. › Allegations of fabrication
4. › Whether trial judge entitled to scrutinise evidence with more particularity than usual

Quick Take

A prior inconsistent statement proved under s 18 of the Evidence Act 1977 (Qld) may be used under s 101 as evidence that an admission was made by a party to the witness whose prior inconsistent statement is proved, even though the admission was not made directly to the witness who proved the prior inconsistent statement. The weight to be given to such evidence must be assessed under s 102 in light of all the circumstances, with the discretion under s 98 providing a safeguard against injustice. Where fabrication of evidence is alleged, a trial judge is entitled to scrutinise the evidence with more particularity than usual.