Pretrial — admissibility — causing loss by deception — filing false return — failing to retain records — expert evidence — "candidate donation" — Electoral Act 1993 — Crimes Act 1961 — Evidence Act 2006, s 25 — R v C [2014] NZHC 3144. The defendant was facing several charges under the Electoral Act and the Crimes Act. The prosecution sought to introduce evidence from an expert witness on the meaning of the phrase "candidate donation". It submitted that the evidence would help the jury to decide whether the payments in issue were a candidate donation. The Court found that the question of whether the payments were a candidate donation was an issue of law, not of fact. It would be up to the trial judge to direct the jury on the question, so the evidence was inadmissible. A second issue in the proceedings was whether the defendant could call a witness to support his case that money he had received was a gift and not a donation. The defendant had spoken to the witness because he had been seeking an expert opinion; however the defendant sought to call the witness to give evidence of what was said in a conversation, rather than to give his opinion on the law. The defendant therefore submitted that he was not calling the witness as an expert. The Court was of the opinion that the judge would have to determine the matter during trial. Judgment Date: 31 August 2023