Hunter and Marsaille (No 2)

In the Family Court of Australia, Justice Kent presided over proceedings involving Ms Hunter (Applicant Mother) and Mr Marsaille (Respondent Father). The central dispute concerned the authenticity of an audio recording, Exhibit 34, which the Mother asserted was made during a supervised visit between the Father and their child. The Father disputed the recording's authenticity, arguing its prejudicial effect would outweigh its probative value.

The court was required to determine whether to admit the audio recording as evidence, and crucially, whether to obtain expert evidence to ascertain its authenticity. Specifically, the court needed to decide if the recording had been tampered with or altered, and if a particular phrase audible on the recording was spoken by the Father. The parties had been unable to agree on the terms for obtaining joint expert evidence, necessitating the court's intervention.

Justice Kent, accepting the recommendation of the Independent Children's Lawyer, appointed Mr F of Pro Copy as the joint expert. The court reasoned that obtaining expert evidence was a necessary preliminary step to address the dispute over the recording's authenticity before ruling on the Father's application to exclude it. The court ordered that Mr F would conduct forensic analysis to determine if the recording had been tampered with and for voice identification. The parties were directed to cooperate fully with Mr F, with the Mother to provide original recording equipment and the Father to supply voice samples. The costs of the forensic report were to be shared equally between the parties. The trial was adjourned to allow for the expert's report and further hearings.