ZL v The Queen

In the case of ZL v The Queen, the appellant sought an interlocutory appeal against the exclusion of certain evidence from their criminal trial. The court was required to decide whether the exclusion of the evidence would substantially weaken the Crown's case and whether the evidence was admissible under the hearsay exception. The appeal was heard in the Court of Appeal of the Supreme Court of Victoria.

The legal issues before the court were whether the exclusion of the evidence would substantially weaken the Crown's case, and whether the hearsay exception applied to the evidence in question. The court considered the relevant statutory provisions, including section 295(3)(a) of the Criminal Procedure Act 2009 and section 65(2)(b) of the Evidence Act 2008. The court also considered the decision in CGL v DPP (No 2) (2010) 24 VR 482, which was relevant to the first issue.

The court held that the exclusion of the evidence would not substantially weaken the Crown's case, as there was other evidence available to support the case. The court also held that the hearsay exception did not apply to the evidence in question, as the person who made the statement was available to give evidence and all reasonable steps had been taken to find them. The court therefore upheld the trial judge's decision to exclude the evidence.

The appeal was dismissed, and the trial judge's decision to exclude the evidence was upheld.