Martin v NSW & Anor

In *Martin v NSW & Anor*, the appellant, Martin, appealed to the court against findings made in relation to her claims of sexual harassment. The respondents were the State of New South Wales and Hoare. The appeal concerned the rejection of certain documents tendered as tendency evidence.

The primary legal issues before the court were whether the trial judge erred in rejecting documents from DOCS' records concerning Hoare's prior conduct at another workplace as tendency evidence against both Hoare and the State. Specifically, the court had to consider whether these documents could prove that Hoare had acted in a particular way on other occasions, whether such conduct was relevant to the alleged actions in January 1998, and whether the requirements of section 97 of the *Evidence Act 1995* (Cth) were met.

The court found that error in the findings as to the occurrence of the events had not been established. While the Tab D documents were admitted against the State as evidence of its knowledge of assertions made about Hoare's conduct, this admission did not permit their use as tendency evidence to prove Hoare's propensity to act in a certain way. The court noted that the tender of these documents as tendency evidence encountered section 97 of the *Evidence Act 1995*, which governs the admissibility of character, reputation, or conduct evidence. The court considered the potential hearsay issues within the documents and the relevance of the alleged prior conduct to the central allegations.

The appeal was dismissed with costs.