QLD BAR COMPREHENSIVE STUDY GUIDE
2026 FULL QUESTIONS AND SOLUTIONS
GRADED A+
◍ What are the rules for when can a court give summary judgment?.
Answer: rr 292-293 UCPRs 31A Federal Court Act and r 26.01 FCR.
◍ Original evidence.
Answer: three heads:Original evidence: When a witness narrates another
person's statement for any purpose other than to convince the court of its
truth.Statements as facts in issue: In cases where the issue is not whether
words were true or false, but whether they were written or spoken, a witness
who heard them can testify to them as performing an act by saying the
words.Statements as facts relevant to the issue: Assertive statements may be
relevant facts in certain situations. If the speaking of words is relevant, a
witness can testify that they were spoken. Hearsay only becomes an issue
when the words are relied upon to establish a fact.Prior
consistent/inconsistent statements of a witness going to the witness' credit:
Previous consistent statements are generally original evidence. Inconsistent
statements are also generally admissible, except when made by a third party
and may be considered an admission.
◍ What is an Application (in Queensland)?.
Answer: Compulsory to be started by application if: (a) the Act or rules do
not state the type of originating process to be used; or (b) a type of
originating process (other than a claim or application) is required or
permitted under a law. (r 10).Applications deal with issues of:Law (and
substantial issues of fact are unlikely),or where there is insufficient time to
prepare a claim because of the urgent nature of the relief (r 11)eg: freezing
orders and search ordersOral application may be sought under r 12.
,◍ Bunning v Cross [1978].
Answer: Rule: Evidence that was obtained unlawfully/improperly must not
be admitted unless the importance/probative value > factors (public interest,
unfairness and prejudice). Codified in s138 CEA. Factors are: deliberateness
of the conduct, probative value of the evidence, ease with which compliance
with law might have been achieved, nature of the offence charged, purpose
of the legislative restrictions.Rationale: Striking a balance between
enforcing public interest with fair policing/disclosure against exclusion of
evidence otherwise not manifestly unfair/prejudicial (eg niche technical
points). Operative deterrence against bad policing and reliance on
exclusionary rules of evidence.
◍ What are leading and non-leading questions with an example?.
Answer: A question that suggests the answer: i.e, He was wearing a red shirt
wasn't he? An open question that invites evidence and discussion: i.e, what
was he wearing?
◍ Procedure for delay in proceedings.
Answer: Dismissal for want of prosecution (where P fails to take step
required by the rules or an order, r 280 UCPR)Continuation of proceeding
after delay - r 389 UCPR + 12 Factors of Tyler v Custom Credit
◍ The elements of Jones v Dunkel?.
Answer: Three elements needed to be met (1) The evidence that is missing
would have been expected to be called by the party against whom the rule is
to be relied on; (2) The evidence that is missing would have been relevant to
determining facts in issue; and (3) No explanation is given for the absence
of the evidence. An explanation for witnesses not providing evidence could
include illness or details about why they may be hostile witnesses.
◍ Documentary hearsay exception.
Answer: ss 92-93 EAQ. Maker of statement must be called unless (1) dead,
or unfit by reason of bodily or mental condition to attend as a witness; or (2)
out of the State and it is not reasonably practicable to secure the attendance;
or (3) can not be found or identified; or (4) they would not have any
, recollection of the matters dealt with; (5) no party to the proceeding who
would have the right to cross-examine; or(6) undue delay or expense would
be caused by calling the maker or supplier as a witness.
◍ Confessions by co-accused.
Answer: Confession by one co-accused is not evidence against another
unless admissible as having been adopted by conduct or made vicariously as
co-conspirator
◍ Best evidence rule.
Answer: Best evidence rule - a party relying on the words used in a
document for any purpose other than that of its identifying must, as a
general rule, adduce primary evidence of its contentso Typically this means
the original
◍ Duty of disclosure/discovery rule?.
Answer: rr 209-227 UCPR / Part 20 FCR
◍ Exceptions to the Finality Rule.
Answer: - Denial of a prior inconsistent statement: s 18, QEA; ss 43,
106(2)(c), CEA.- Previously lied under oath: Bromley; s 106(2)(e), CEA.-
Bias in favour of one party: Umanski; s 106(2)(a), CEA.- Corruption: R v
Nicholls v Coates.- Physical or mental instability, or unreliability: Bromley,
s 106(2)(d), CEA.Denial of previous conviction: s 16, QEA; 106(2)(b), CEA
◍ Leading questions.
Answer: May be used during XE, subject to rules of improper questions at
s21 EAQ.
◍ How do you plead a non-admission?.
Answer: Only if you have made reasonable inquiries, remain uncertain as to
truth/falsity of allegation while remaining under a continuing obligation of
disclosure.
◍ Rules of evidence in chief.
Answer: No leading questions (except for matters not in dispute/introductory
etc).Cannot impeach own witness (except for hostile witness (somewhat, but
2026 FULL QUESTIONS AND SOLUTIONS
GRADED A+
◍ What are the rules for when can a court give summary judgment?.
Answer: rr 292-293 UCPRs 31A Federal Court Act and r 26.01 FCR.
◍ Original evidence.
Answer: three heads:Original evidence: When a witness narrates another
person's statement for any purpose other than to convince the court of its
truth.Statements as facts in issue: In cases where the issue is not whether
words were true or false, but whether they were written or spoken, a witness
who heard them can testify to them as performing an act by saying the
words.Statements as facts relevant to the issue: Assertive statements may be
relevant facts in certain situations. If the speaking of words is relevant, a
witness can testify that they were spoken. Hearsay only becomes an issue
when the words are relied upon to establish a fact.Prior
consistent/inconsistent statements of a witness going to the witness' credit:
Previous consistent statements are generally original evidence. Inconsistent
statements are also generally admissible, except when made by a third party
and may be considered an admission.
◍ What is an Application (in Queensland)?.
Answer: Compulsory to be started by application if: (a) the Act or rules do
not state the type of originating process to be used; or (b) a type of
originating process (other than a claim or application) is required or
permitted under a law. (r 10).Applications deal with issues of:Law (and
substantial issues of fact are unlikely),or where there is insufficient time to
prepare a claim because of the urgent nature of the relief (r 11)eg: freezing
orders and search ordersOral application may be sought under r 12.
,◍ Bunning v Cross [1978].
Answer: Rule: Evidence that was obtained unlawfully/improperly must not
be admitted unless the importance/probative value > factors (public interest,
unfairness and prejudice). Codified in s138 CEA. Factors are: deliberateness
of the conduct, probative value of the evidence, ease with which compliance
with law might have been achieved, nature of the offence charged, purpose
of the legislative restrictions.Rationale: Striking a balance between
enforcing public interest with fair policing/disclosure against exclusion of
evidence otherwise not manifestly unfair/prejudicial (eg niche technical
points). Operative deterrence against bad policing and reliance on
exclusionary rules of evidence.
◍ What are leading and non-leading questions with an example?.
Answer: A question that suggests the answer: i.e, He was wearing a red shirt
wasn't he? An open question that invites evidence and discussion: i.e, what
was he wearing?
◍ Procedure for delay in proceedings.
Answer: Dismissal for want of prosecution (where P fails to take step
required by the rules or an order, r 280 UCPR)Continuation of proceeding
after delay - r 389 UCPR + 12 Factors of Tyler v Custom Credit
◍ The elements of Jones v Dunkel?.
Answer: Three elements needed to be met (1) The evidence that is missing
would have been expected to be called by the party against whom the rule is
to be relied on; (2) The evidence that is missing would have been relevant to
determining facts in issue; and (3) No explanation is given for the absence
of the evidence. An explanation for witnesses not providing evidence could
include illness or details about why they may be hostile witnesses.
◍ Documentary hearsay exception.
Answer: ss 92-93 EAQ. Maker of statement must be called unless (1) dead,
or unfit by reason of bodily or mental condition to attend as a witness; or (2)
out of the State and it is not reasonably practicable to secure the attendance;
or (3) can not be found or identified; or (4) they would not have any
, recollection of the matters dealt with; (5) no party to the proceeding who
would have the right to cross-examine; or(6) undue delay or expense would
be caused by calling the maker or supplier as a witness.
◍ Confessions by co-accused.
Answer: Confession by one co-accused is not evidence against another
unless admissible as having been adopted by conduct or made vicariously as
co-conspirator
◍ Best evidence rule.
Answer: Best evidence rule - a party relying on the words used in a
document for any purpose other than that of its identifying must, as a
general rule, adduce primary evidence of its contentso Typically this means
the original
◍ Duty of disclosure/discovery rule?.
Answer: rr 209-227 UCPR / Part 20 FCR
◍ Exceptions to the Finality Rule.
Answer: - Denial of a prior inconsistent statement: s 18, QEA; ss 43,
106(2)(c), CEA.- Previously lied under oath: Bromley; s 106(2)(e), CEA.-
Bias in favour of one party: Umanski; s 106(2)(a), CEA.- Corruption: R v
Nicholls v Coates.- Physical or mental instability, or unreliability: Bromley,
s 106(2)(d), CEA.Denial of previous conviction: s 16, QEA; 106(2)(b), CEA
◍ Leading questions.
Answer: May be used during XE, subject to rules of improper questions at
s21 EAQ.
◍ How do you plead a non-admission?.
Answer: Only if you have made reasonable inquiries, remain uncertain as to
truth/falsity of allegation while remaining under a continuing obligation of
disclosure.
◍ Rules of evidence in chief.
Answer: No leading questions (except for matters not in dispute/introductory
etc).Cannot impeach own witness (except for hostile witness (somewhat, but
