Supreme Court decision on cross-examination and leading questions
📖 What the law says
Under this section, a party can ask leading questions during cross-examination unless the court decides to disallow the question or instructs the witness not to answer it. The court considers several factors before making this decision, including the nature of the witness's previous testimony, the witness's interests, sympathy towards the cross-examiner, and any disabilities that might affect the witness's responses. The court will disallow leading questions if it believes the facts would be better understood without them.
Plain-English explanation — does not replace advice from a legal practitioner.
📖 Technical summary
The court ruled on the use of leading questions in cross-examination under the Evidence Act.
📚 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 ↗
📊 How courts decide similar cases
Among 12 similar decisions in this collection:
- Court of Criminal Appeal (NSW) Court Increases Sentence for Malicious Infliction of Grievous Bodily Harm
- Supreme Court of New South Wales NSW Supreme Court Grants Restraining Order Against Suspected Criminal
- District Court of New South Wales Offender Sentenced for Smuggling Tobacco to Avoid Customs Duty
- Court of Criminal Appeal (NSW) Majority Verdict Errors Lead to Conviction Quash
- Supreme Court of New South Wales Supreme Court Offers Guidance on Trust Distribution
- Supreme Court of New South Wales Supreme Court Grants Extension in Liquidation Proceeding
- Supreme Court of New South Wales Supreme Court Rules Director Can Inspect Solicitor-Held Documents
- Federal Court of Australia Federal Court Imposes $1.2 Million Penalty for Continuous Disclosure Violat…
- Federal Court of Australia Federal Court Approves Settlement Administration Costs
- Supreme Court of New South Wales Supreme Court Rules State Liable for School Accident Injuries
A snapshot of this collection — not a prediction of your case's outcome.
⚖️ What tends to weigh in cases like this
✅ Tends to be accepted
- The judge accepted that leading questions should not be allowed when the witness is sympathetic to the defendant.
- The judge agreed that leading questions are inappropriate if the witness has an interest consistent with the defense's position.
- The judge ruled that leading questions may undermine the reliability of a witness's answers, especially in cases where the witness shows sympathy towards the accused.
❌ Tends to be rejected
- The defense argument that psychological conditions should be broadly considered under s 42(2)(d) was rejected by the court.
- The prosecution's claim that leading questions are necessary to clarify inconsistencies was not accepted for subject areas covered by the ruling.
Patterns observed in similar cases in this collection — every case is unique.
❓ Frequently asked questions
Who was involved?
A judge, an accused person, and their spouse as a witness were involved.
Was the decision for or against the person who brought the case?
The decision was in favour of the Crown, as it supported disallowing leading questions that could affect the reliability of a witness's answers.
What evidence or documents mattered?
The court considered written submissions and oral arguments from both parties, as well as previous case law on cross-examination and leading questions.
Can a decision like this be appealed?
Yes, decisions of the Supreme Court can generally be appealed to higher courts such as the High Court of Australia.
Is it worth getting a solicitor for a case like this?
It is always recommended to seek advice from a qualified solicitor for legal matters involving cross-examination and leading questions.