(1) At the first mention of proceedings in the court before which the trial is
proposed to be heard or at any other time, the court may order that a
pre-trial conference is to be held so long as the time appointed for any such
conference occurs after the indictment has been presented or filed.
(2) The
court may order the holding of a pre-trial conference under this section on
application of any party or on the court's own initiative.
(a) to determine whether the
accused person and the prosecutor are able to reach agreement regarding the
evidence to be admitted at the trial,
(b) to identify the key issues in
dispute between the accused person and the prosecutor at the trial, if any,
(c) to identify any other issues relating to the proceedings against the
accused person that require resolution prior to the commencement of the trial,
(d) to identify or determine any other matter as directed by the court.
(b) the Australian legal practitioner representing the
accused person.
(6) If the accused person has been charged jointly with any
other person with the offence concerned, a joint pre-trial conference may be
held in respect of two or more co-accused, but only with the consent of the
prosecution and each of the co-accused concerned.
(7) A requirement under
this section that a person be present for the purposes of a
pre-trial conference is taken to be satisfied if the person is present or
available by way of an audio visual link or telephone.
(a) is to indicate the areas of agreement and
disagreement between the accused person and the prosecutor regarding the
evidence to be admitted at the trial, and
(b) is to be signed by the
prosecutor and the Australian legal practitioner representing the
accused person.
(10) Except with the leave of the court, a party to
proceedings may not object to the admission of any evidence at trial if the
pre-trial conference form indicates that the parties have agreed that the
evidence is not in dispute.
(11) Leave is not to be granted under subsection
(10) unless the court is of the opinion that it would be contrary to the
interests of justice to refuse leave.