R v Hayley Anne Jansen

The appeal concerned the conviction of Hayley Anne Jansen for the offence of driving under the influence of alcohol. The dispute arose from the Crown's reliance on a certificate of analysis for a blood sample taken from Ms Jansen, which indicated a blood alcohol concentration exceeding the prescribed limit. The appeal was heard by the Supreme Court of Queensland.

The central legal issue before the Court was whether the certificate of analysis was admissible as evidence, given that the analyst who prepared it was not called to give oral evidence at the trial. This raised questions regarding the proper application of the hearsay rule and the exceptions to it, particularly concerning documentary evidence in criminal proceedings. The Court was required to determine if the certificate met the statutory requirements for admissibility in the absence of the analyst's testimony.

The Court reasoned that the certificate of analysis, while purporting to be admissible under a specific provision of the *Evidence Act 1977* (Qld), did not satisfy the conditions for its admission as a business record exception to the hearsay rule. Crucially, the Court found that the certificate lacked the necessary certification or attestation that would render it admissible without the analyst's appearance. Consequently, the admission of the certificate at trial was deemed to be an error, as it constituted inadmissible hearsay evidence.

The appeal was upheld, and the conviction was quashed.