How does the treatment of unfavourable witnesses differ under the EAC compared to common law?

Under the Evidence Act in Queensland (EAC), the treatment of unfavourable witnesses is notably different from common law in that it does not depend on the demonstration of hostility. This means that a party can cross-examine a witness who is not supportive of their case without having to first establish that the witness is hostile towards them.

In the common law framework, establishing that a witness is hostile is a prerequisite for a party to be granted the opportunity to treat that witness as an unfavourable one, which includes leading questions during cross-examination. This requirement can limit the effectiveness of the questioning, as it requires a particular legal showing before being able to engage with the witness in a more assertive way.

In contrast, the EAC allows for a more straightforward approach, enabling parties to address the testimony of unfavourable witnesses more flexibly. This is particularly beneficial in situations where a witness may be recalcitrant or evasive, as it means that the party can directly challenge the credibility and relevance of the witness's testimony without first needing to label their attitude as hostile.

The other options suggest requirements or conditions that do not align with the provisions of the EAC regarding unfavourable witnesses, making them less relevant in this context.