VadeLab
DismissedCourt of Criminal Appeal (NSW)·

Appeal Dismissed: Admissibility of Interpreter's Evidence Upheld

Case No.

⚖️ Legal holding

An expert's evidence may still be admitted despite not complying with the expert witness code of conduct if the evidence is reliable and relevant.

Topics

expert evidencecode of conductadmissibility

Provisions

Evidence Act 1995 (NSW)Supreme Court Act 1970 (NSW)Supreme Court Rules 1970 (NSW)District Court Act 1973 (NSW)

📚 Full judgment

The summary, holding and questions above are VadeLab’s own material. The official decision itself is published by the court, and we do not reproduce it on this page.

📄 Read the full judgment⚖️ View on the official court website ↗

⚖️ What tends to weigh in cases like this

✅ Tends to be accepted

  • An expert's failure to comply with the expert's code of conduct does not make their evidence inadmissible.
  • The expert's evidence was highly probative because it could rationally affect the assessment of a fact in issue.
  • The judge correctly concluded that the expert's evidence and translations could not be withdrawn from the jury.

❌ Tends to be rejected

  • The argument that the expert's bias was a reason for not admitting her evidence was rejected.
  • The argument that the expert's concessions about translation errors meant her evidence should be excluded was rejected.
  • The argument that the expert's evidence was unfairly prejudicial due to disputed translations was rejected.
  • The argument that the judge failed to give necessary directions about the expert's translation of a specific word was rejected.

Patterns observed in similar cases in this collection — every case is unique.

❓ Frequently asked questions

What was the argument that mattered most?

The argument that mattered most was that the interpreter's evidence was reliable and relevant despite her lack of compliance with the expert witness code of conduct.

Was the decision for or against the person who brought the case?

The decision was against the person who brought the case, as the appeal was dismissed.

What does this mean for someone in a similar situation?

For someone in a similar situation, the decision means that an interpreter's evidence may still be admitted in court even if they do not comply with the expert witness code of conduct, provided the evidence is reliable and relevant.

What evidence or documents mattered?

The evidence and documents that mattered were the intercepted telephone calls and the interpreter's translations of those calls.

Official source: Court of Criminal Appeal (NSW) — this page does not reproduce the decision; it links to the court's own publication. View on the official source ↗Summary, holding, technical summary and questions: produced by Artificial Intelligence based on the official headnote and judgment. These are VadeLab’s own material and are not the work of the Court.This decision was issued by the Court of Criminal Appeal (NSW) and is reproduced from NSW Caselaw (© State of New South Wales) under its published republication policy. VadeLab is not affiliated with, and this page is not endorsed by, that court or tribunal.
Appeal Dismissed: Admissibility of Interpreter's Evidence | VadeLab