247MDispensing with formal proof

#### 247M Dispensing with formal proof 247M Dispensing with formal proof > > (1) If a fact, matter or circumstance was alleged in a notice required to be given to the defendant by the prosecutor in accordance with this Division and the defendant was required to give a defence response under section 247K but did not disclose in the response an intention to dispute or require proof of the fact, matter or circumstance, the court may order that— > > > > > (a) a document asserting the alleged fact, matter or circumstance may be admitted at the hearing of the proceedings as evidence of the fact, matter or circumstance, and > > > > > (b) evidence may not, without the leave of the court, be adduced to contradict or qualify the alleged fact, matter or circumstance. > > > (2) If evidence was disclosed by the prosecution to the defendant in accordance with this Division and the defendant was required to give a defence response under section 247K but did not disclose in the response an intention to dispute the admissibility of the evidence and the basis for the objection, the court may, by order, dispense with the application of any one or more of the following provisions of the [Evidence Act 1995](/view/html/inforce/current/act-1995-025) in relation to the adducing of the evidence at the hearing of the proceedings— > > > > > (a) Division 3, 4 or 5 of Part 2.1, > > > > > (b) Part 2.2 or 2.3, > > > > > (c) Parts 3.2–3.8. > > > (3) The court may, on the application of a party, direct that the party may adduce evidence of 2 or more witnesses in the form of a summary if the court is satisfied that— > > > > > (a) the summary is not misleading or confusing, and > > > > > (b) admission of the summary instead of evidence from the witnesses will not result in unfair prejudice to any party to the proceedings. > > > (4) The court may, in a direction under subsection (3), require that one or more of the witnesses whose evidence is to be adduced in the form of a summary are to be available for cross-examination. > > > (5) The opinion rule (within the meaning of the [Evidence Act 1995](/view/html/inforce/current/act-1995-025)) does not apply to evidence adduced in accordance with a direction under subsection (3). > > > (6) The provisions of this section are in addition to the provisions of the [Evidence Act 1995](/view/html/inforce/current/act-1995-025), in particular, section 190. > > > (7) This section does not affect section 4 (2) of the [Evidence Act 1995](/view/html/inforce/current/act-1995-025). > > > > Note. > > > > Section 4 (2) of the [Evidence Act 1995](/view/html/inforce/current/act-1995-025) provides that the Act applies in proceedings relating to sentencing only if the court directs that the law of evidence apply in the proceedings. > > **ss 247F–247P:** Ins 2012 No 10, Sch 1 \[3\].