Stanoevski v The Queen

HIGH COURT OF AUSTRALIAGAUDRON, McHUGH, KIRBY, HAYNE AND CALLINAN JJLILJANA STANOEVSKI  APPELLANTANDTHE QUEEN  RESPONDENTStanoevski v The Queen [2001] HCA 48 February 2001S251/1999ORDER1.Appeal allowed.2.Set aside the judgment of the Court of Criminal Appeal dated 24 February 1998.3.In lieu thereof order that :(a)      the appellant’s appeal to that Court be allowed;(b)        the appellant’s conviction be set aside; and(c)         there be a new trial of the appellant.On appeal from the Supreme Court of New South WalesRepresentation:T A Game SC with S J Odgers and A S Kostopoulos for the appellant (instructed by Greg Walsh & Co)T L Buddin SC with R A Hulme for the respondent (instructed by Solicitor for Public Prosecutions (New South Wales))Notice:  This copy of the Court's Reasons for Judgment is subject to formal revision prior to publication in the Commonwealth Law Reports.CATCHWORDSStanoevski v The QueenEvidence – Evidence Act 1995 (NSW) – Character evidence – Accused raised own good character – Judicial discretion to allow cross-examination of accused on alleged past misdeeds not directly related to facts in issue – Whether discretion to allow cross-examination miscarried.Words and phrases – "good character" – "credibility" – "leave, permission or direction" – "unfairness".Evidence Act 1995 (NSW), ss 55, 56, 102, 104, 106, 112, 135, 192.Legal Profession Act 1987 (NSW), s 155.GAUDRON, KIRBY AND CALLINAN JJ. This appeal raises questions about the meaning and application of s 192 of the Evidence Act 1995 (NSW) ("the Act") to the adducing of, and cross-examination on, character evidence. The facts The appellant had been in practice as...