Is T.G.N. confirmation that Khelawon ushers in an new era where the Crown has an easier time obtaining rulings admitting hearsay under the principled exception?

We suspect that Khelawon will lead to a greater influx of hearsay. But just how much remains to be seen. In fact, T.G.N. is an interesting case because despite this new approach the Court of Appeal ruled that the trial judge had erred in finding the hearsay to be sufficiently reliable. The problem was that the hearsay came from a recanting witness. He had initially given a statement to police implicating the 3 accused, but at trial stated that he remembered nothing about the events in question due to heavy drinking, and had lied in his statement, telling the police what he thought they wanted to hear. Given that the witness claimed to remember nothing, he couldn't be meaningfully cross-examined by the accused. The inability to cross-examine combined with the witness' claim, under oath at trial, that he had lied in his statement to police, dealt a serious blow to the Crown's attempt to establish reliability. There were other weaknesses when it came to reliability, including a strong motive to lie, but this was the real killer, and the result was that the convictions were overturned and acquittals entered instead.

So, T.G.N. shows that a spot of corroborative evidence doesn't necessarily sink the defence. Moreover, there will be cases where the defence can point to external facts that tend to undermine the impugned hearsay, in which case Khelawon will inure to the benefit of the accused. Ditto where it is the Defence that seeks to lead hearsay under the principled exception; if the defence can point to corroborating evidence Khelawon becomes a friend and the result may be the admission of evidence that helps to secure an acquittal.