Anderson v The Queen

Anderson appealed his conviction for murder to the High Court of Australia. The central dispute concerned the admissibility of certain evidence obtained from the appellant, which the appellant argued was obtained in contravention of his common law rights.

The High Court was required to determine whether evidence obtained from the appellant, following his arrest and whilst he was in custody, was admissible in his trial. Specifically, the court considered whether the evidence was obtained in circumstances that rendered it unfair to the appellant, thereby justifying its exclusion in the exercise of the court's discretion.

The court affirmed the principle that a trial judge has a discretion to exclude evidence, even if legally obtained, if its admission would be unfair to the accused. This discretion is to be exercised by balancing the probative value of the evidence against its prejudicial effect. In this instance, the court found that the evidence in question was not obtained in circumstances that rendered its admission unfair, and therefore the conviction was upheld.