Eastman v Director of Public Prosecutions of the Act and Ors C10/2002

The High Court of Australia considered an appeal by Mr. Eastman against the Director of Public Prosecutions of the Australian Capital Territory and others. The dispute concerned the admissibility of evidence obtained through a covert listening device, specifically a bug placed in Mr. Eastman's home. Mr. Eastman had been charged with offences under the Crimes Act 1914 (Cth) and the Drugs of Dependence Act 1989 (ACT).

The central legal issue before the High Court was whether the evidence obtained by the covert listening device was admissible in criminal proceedings, notwithstanding that its installation and use may have constituted an unlawful interference with Mr. Eastman's privacy. This involved a consideration of the common law, particularly the rule against admitting evidence obtained unlawfully, and the potential impact of statutory provisions on this rule.

Gaudron and Gummow JJ, in their joint judgment, affirmed the principle that the court retains a discretion to exclude evidence obtained unlawfully or unfairly, even if it is relevant. They reasoned that while the common law does not automatically render unlawfully obtained evidence inadmissible, the court must weigh the probative value of the evidence against the unfairness to the accused and the public interest in the due administration of justice. In this instance, their Honours found that the installation of the listening device was an unlawful act and that the admission of the evidence obtained thereby would be unfair to Mr. Eastman. Consequently, the appeal was allowed, and the evidence was excluded.