Duff v The Queen

The High Court of Australia considered an appeal by the applicant, Mr. Duff, against his conviction for murder. The case concerned the admissibility of certain evidence during his trial.

The central legal issue before the High Court was whether the trial judge had erred in admitting evidence of the applicant's prior convictions and prior bad character. This evidence was admitted on the basis that it was relevant to the applicant's propensity to commit the offence charged. The High Court was required to determine if this admission contravened the general rule against admitting evidence of prior convictions or bad character, and if any exceptions to that rule applied.

The High Court held that the admission of the evidence of prior convictions and bad character was an error. Their Honours applied the principles established in cases such as *M v The Queen*, which confirm that evidence of a person's prior convictions or bad character is generally inadmissible to prove that the person committed the offence charged, as it is likely to be unfairly prejudicial. The court found that the evidence admitted did not fall within any recognised exception to this exclusionary rule, and its prejudicial effect outweighed any probative value it may have had.

Consequently, the High Court allowed the appeal, quashed the conviction, and ordered a new trial.