R v Macdonald; R v Edward Obeid; R v Moses Obeid (No 15)

In the case of R v Macdonald; R v Edward Obeid; R v Moses Obeid (No 15), the defendants were charged with various criminal offences related to fraud and corruption. The case was heard in the Supreme Court of New South Wales. The defendants contested the admissibility of certain statements made by individuals other than the accused, arguing that these statements were hearsay and should not be considered by the jury. Specifically, they argued that the statements did not fall under any exceptions to the hearsay rule.

The court was required to determine whether the statements in question could be admitted as admissions against interest or as admissions made with authority. The defendants contended that the statements were not admissions against interest because they did not necessarily expose the speakers to a detriment. They also argued that the statements were not admissions made with authority because the individuals who made the statements did not have the requisite authority to bind the defendants in relation to the charges.

The court held that the statements could be admitted as admissions against interest because they were of such a nature that it would have been against the speakers' interest to make them if they were not true. The court also found that the statements could be admitted as admissions made with authority because the individuals who made the statements were acting in their capacity as agents or representatives of the defendants. The court held that these admissions were sufficiently reliable to be considered by the jury. As a result, the statements were admitted as evidence and considered in the trial.

The final orders of the court were that the statements in question were admissible as evidence against the defendants and could be considered by the jury in determining the guilt or innocence of the accused. The trial proceeded with the statements being taken into account in the deliberation of the jury.