R v Al Batat (No 28)

The matter before the court was an appeal by the respondent against a decision to allow the prosecution to cross-examine a witness, Al Batat, who was unfavourable to the prosecution. The dispute concerned whether the trial judge correctly exercised his discretion to permit the prosecution to cross-examine its own witness, despite a prior ruling that the witness was not to be cross-examined. The appeal was heard in the Supreme Court of New South Wales.

The court was required to determine whether the trial judge erred in varying his earlier order to permit the prosecution to cross-examine the witness. The court needed to consider whether the trial judge had acted within his discretion in varying the order and whether such variation would cause prejudice to the respondent. The court also needed to consider whether the matters to be cross-examined were relevant to the charges against the respondent.

The court held that the trial judge did not err in varying his order to permit the prosecution to cross-examine the witness. The court found that the trial judge had acted within his discretion in varying the order and that such variation would not cause prejudice to the respondent. The court also held that the matters to be cross-examined were relevant to the charges against the respondent. The court found that the relevant count concerning the shooting of the witness's house had been severed from the indictment, and the interlocutory triumphs were not applicable. The court held that permitting cross-examination would not create incurable prejudice to the respondent. The appeal was dismissed.

The court ordered that the appeal be dismissed and that the earlier orders of the trial judge be upheld. The court further ordered that the cross-examination of the witness be allowed.