Stanoevski v The Queen (2001) 202 CLR 115

Facts: The prosecution (Pr) wanted to rebut claims of honesty through the use of Law Society Report which contained claims of dishonesty and opinion of a signature expert that the defendant’s (D) signature cannot be eliminated as being the forger. However, the allegations in the report came from her co-D. Leave to cross-examine (CE) was granted without consideration of s 192 Evidence Act factors. 

Want to read more?

Subscribe to casetreasury.com to keep reading this exclusive post.

Subscribe Now