Fletcher (a pseudonym) v Knight (a pseudonym) (No 2)

The appeal and cross-appeal concerned the admissibility of evidence obtained under a three-condition warrant. The primary legal issues were whether the requisite belief for the seizure of property under such a warrant needed to be formed prior to the seizure, and whether an attempted cover-up of a contravention of Australian law by police was relevant to the balancing exercise under section 138 of the Evidence Act 2011 (ACT). The court also considered the appropriate standard of appellate review for decisions made under section 138, determining that a correctness standard applied, rather than the more deferential "House v The King" error standard, and that the decision in *Sidaros v The Queen* [2020] ACTCA 11 should be followed.

The Court of Appeal dismissed both the appeal and the cross-appeal. It reasoned that the appeal against the ruling admitting unlawfully obtained evidence under section 138 of the Evidence Act 2011 (ACT) failed because the appellants had not established a "House v The King" error. The court applied a correctness standard to its review of the decision, finding no error in the original decision to admit the evidence. The cross-appeal, which argued for the exclusion of evidence due to an attempted cover-up by police, was also dismissed. The court found that while the attempted cover-up was relevant to the overall consideration of undesirability under section 138, it did not, in this instance, outweigh the desirability of admitting the evidence.