← All Authorities
Australia

Warden v Bailey

(2020) 103 NSWLR 207
JurisdictionAustralia
Year2020
Statusunclear

Key Principle

tendency and coincidence evidence; Uniform Evidence Act s.97-98; significant probative value test; Bauer guidelines

Area of Law

evidence

Related Cases

IMM v The Queen (2016) 257 CLR 300

Under UEA s 97, tendency evidence in sexual offence cases requires significant probative value but no striking similarity between the tendency and charged acts.

Dasreef Pty Ltd v Hawchar (2011) 243 CLR 588

Expert opinion evidence is admissible only if based on specialised knowledge, and the expert must identify the facts and reasoning underlying the opinion.

Chief Executive Officer of Customs v El Hajje (2005) 224 CLR 159

Under the Briginshaw standard, the civil balance of probabilities requires evidence of a quality commensurate with the gravity of the allegation.

Ask CommonBench about this case

Get a detailed analysis of Warden v Bailey and how it applies to your situation.

Explain Warden v Bailey