CD & Anor v Commonwealth of Australia; CD & Anor v Director of Public Prosecutions (SA) & Anor

The High Court of Australia considered two applications for special leave to appeal concerning the admissibility of evidence obtained through covert surveillance. The applicants, CD and another individual, sought to challenge decisions made by the Director of Public Prosecutions (SA) and the Commonwealth of Australia regarding the use of this evidence in criminal proceedings.

The central legal issue before the Court was whether the applicants had established a sufficient arguable case of error in the decisions to admit the surveillance evidence, thereby justifying the grant of special leave to appeal. This involved an examination of the principles governing the admissibility of evidence obtained by law enforcement agencies, particularly in circumstances where the evidence might otherwise be excluded due to its method of acquisition.

Gageler CJ, in refusing special leave, found that the applicants had not demonstrated a sufficient arguable case of error in the lower courts' application of the relevant legal principles. His Honour noted that the decisions to admit the evidence were made after careful consideration of the circumstances and the applicable legal tests, and that no substantial point of law requiring determination by the High Court had been raised. The applications for special leave to appeal were therefore dismissed.