Arundell v The Queen

In *Arundell v The Queen*, the High Court of Australia considered an appeal by the applicant, Arundell, against his conviction for murder. The central dispute concerned the admissibility of certain evidence obtained during a police investigation.

The High Court was required to determine whether the evidence, which included statements made by the applicant to police, had been obtained in contravention of the *Crimes Act 1914* (Cth) and, if so, whether it should have been excluded from admission at trial under the discretion to exclude unfairly obtained evidence. A further issue was whether the trial judge had erred in admitting the evidence.

The Court reasoned that the applicant's statements were made in circumstances where he had not been cautioned as required by s 23F of the *Crimes Act 1914* (Cth). However, the Court held that the failure to caution did not automatically render the evidence inadmissible. Instead, the trial judge retained a discretion to admit the evidence if its probative value outweighed any unfair prejudice to the applicant. The High Court found that the trial judge had properly exercised this discretion, considering the circumstances in which the statements were made and their relevance to the charge.

The appeal was dismissed.