Anderson v The Queen

Anderson appealed to the High Court of Australia against his conviction for murder. The central dispute concerned the admissibility of evidence obtained through a covert recording of a conversation between Anderson and a prison informant. Anderson argued that the recording was obtained in contravention of his right to privacy and was therefore inadmissible.

The High Court was required to determine whether the admission of the covertly obtained recording constituted a miscarriage of justice. This involved considering the principles governing the admissibility of evidence obtained in contravention of an individual's rights, particularly in the context of criminal proceedings, and whether the trial judge had erred in admitting the evidence.

Gummow and Crennan JJ, in their joint judgment, affirmed the common law principle that evidence obtained unlawfully or improperly may still be admitted if its probative value outweighs its prejudicial effect. They found that while the recording may have been obtained in circumstances that engaged privacy concerns, the trial judge had properly exercised their discretion in admitting the evidence, having regard to the significant probative value of the recording in establishing Anderson's guilt. The court concluded that the admission of the evidence did not occasion a miscarriage of justice.