CTM v The Queen

The High Court of Australia considered an appeal by CTM against his conviction for a sexual offence. The dispute concerned the admissibility of certain evidence during CTM's trial.

The central legal issue before the High Court was whether the trial judge had erred in admitting evidence of CTM's prior sexual misconduct, which was alleged to be similar to the offence charged. This involved determining whether the evidence was relevant and, if so, whether its probative value outweighed its prejudicial effect, in accordance with the principles governing the admission of such evidence in criminal proceedings.

The High Court, in a joint judgment, held that the evidence of prior sexual misconduct was not admissible. Their Honours reasoned that the similarities between the prior conduct and the offence charged were not sufficiently striking or unique to establish a nexus between them that went beyond mere propensity. The court emphasised that evidence of prior misconduct should only be admitted where its probative value in establishing a fact in issue is substantial and outweighs the risk of unfair prejudice to the accused. In this instance, the similarities were not so distinctive as to warrant departure from the general rule that evidence of bad character or prior misconduct is inadmissible.

The appeal was allowed, the conviction was quashed, and a new trial was ordered.