DJV v R

The appeal before the court involved DJV, the appellant, against the Crown, the respondent. DJV was charged with serious criminal offences, including murder, and the case was heard in the Supreme Court of Victoria. The dispute centred around the admissibility of certain evidence, specifically tendency evidence that was tendered to provide context or insight into the relationship between the parties. The appellant contested the admission of this evidence, arguing that it was not relevant to any issue in the trial and that its inclusion was prejudicial and led to a miscarriage of justice.

The legal issues before the court included the proper application of sections 97, 101, 135, and 137 of the Evidence Act 1995 concerning the admissibility of tendency evidence. The court had to determine whether the evidence was relevant to an issue in the trial and whether it was permissible to use such evidence to establish context or relationship. Additionally, the court examined whether the trial judge's directions to the jury regarding the use of context or relationship evidence were correct, as well as the impact of any erroneous submissions by counsel on the trial's outcome.

The court found that the evidence in question was improperly admitted as it did not meet the relevance threshold required by the Evidence Act. The court noted that the evidence was not necessary to establish any fact of consequence in the determination of the action. Moreover, the trial judge misdirected the jury on the permissible use of context or relationship evidence, and counsel made erroneous submissions that further compounded the error. These issues combined to create a substantial risk of a miscarriage of justice. Consequently, the court allowed the appeal and ordered a new trial to ensure a fair and just outcome.