Cesan v The Queen; Rivadavia v The Queen

The High Court of Australia considered appeals by Cesan and Rivadavia against their convictions for murder. The central dispute concerned the admissibility of evidence obtained through covert surveillance, specifically recordings made by listening devices planted in the applicants' vehicles. The applicants argued that the use of this evidence violated their right to privacy and was therefore inadmissible.

The Court was required to determine whether the common law of Australia recognises a right to privacy that would render evidence obtained by unlawful or unauthorised surveillance inadmissible. It also had to consider whether, even if such a right existed, the evidence in question should have been excluded on discretionary grounds, such as being unfairly prejudicial or an abuse of process.

The majority of the High Court held that while a right to privacy is a concept recognised in Australian law, it is not a standalone ground for excluding evidence obtained through unauthorised surveillance. Instead, the admissibility of such evidence is governed by the common law rules of evidence, including the discretion to exclude unfairly prejudicial evidence or evidence obtained in contravention of statutory provisions. The Court found that the evidence obtained through the listening devices was admissible, as its probative value outweighed any potential prejudice, and there was no statutory prohibition against its admission.

The appeals were dismissed.