Cheng, Cheng, Chan v The Queen

The High Court of Australia considered an appeal by the appellants, Cheng, Cheng and Chan, against their convictions for conspiracy to import a commercial quantity of heroin. The appellants were convicted in the District Court of New South Wales and their appeals to the Court of Criminal Appeal of New South Wales were dismissed. The central dispute concerned the admissibility of certain evidence, specifically recordings of conversations intercepted pursuant to a warrant issued under the *Crimes Act 1914* (Cth).

The primary legal issue before the High Court was whether the recordings of conversations, which had been made by a person who was not a party to the conversations, were admissible in evidence. This question turned on the interpretation of section 27H of the *Crimes Act 1914* (Cth), which governs the admissibility of evidence obtained under a warrant for the interception of communications. The appellants argued that the recordings were inadmissible because the person making the recordings was not a party to the conversations, and therefore the recordings did not fall within the scope of section 27H.

The High Court, by majority, held that the recordings were admissible. The Court reasoned that section 27H was not intended to limit the admissibility of recordings to those made by a party to the conversation. Instead, the provision was concerned with the lawful obtaining of the recording itself. The Court found that the recordings were lawfully obtained pursuant to a valid warrant, and that the purpose of section 27H was to ensure that evidence obtained through lawful interception was not rendered inadmissible simply because it was obtained by means of a recording device. The Court emphasised that the focus was on the legality of the interception process, not on the identity of the person operating the recording equipment.

The appeals were dismissed.