An acknowledgement by the maker of a statement that they would be liable to prosecution for false statements is a circumstance capable of supporting a finding under s 65(2)(b) of the Evidence Act 1995 that the representations were made in circumstances making fabrication unlikely. The absence of cross-examination of the maker cannot be a standalone ground for rejecting evidence admitted under s 65(2)(b) or (d), as unavailability is a precondition to the section's operation. The application of s 165 warnings does not mandate rejection of the evidence.
The full text is available to signed-in members, including the 11 later cases that cite this judgment.