FX v The Queen

The High Court of Australia considered an appeal by FX against a conviction for sexual offences. The central dispute concerned the admissibility of certain evidence, specifically recordings of interviews with the complainant, which the appellant argued should have been excluded under s 137 of the *Uniform Evidence Law*. The appeal was heard by Kiefel CJ and Steward J.

The primary legal issue before the Court was whether the trial judge erred in admitting the interview recordings into evidence. This required the Court to determine whether the probative value of the recordings was outweighed by the danger of unfair prejudice to the appellant, as contemplated by s 137 of the *Uniform Evidence Law*. The Court also considered whether the trial judge had adequately discharged their duty to ensure a fair trial, particularly in light of the potentially prejudicial nature of the evidence.

In their joint judgment, Kiefel CJ and Steward J held that the trial judge had not erred in admitting the recordings. Their Honours reasoned that the probative value of the recordings lay in their ability to demonstrate the complainant's demeanour and consistency, which were relevant to assessing her credibility. While acknowledging the potential for unfair prejudice, the Court found that the trial judge had properly balanced the probative value against the prejudicial effect, and that appropriate directions to the jury had mitigated any undue prejudice. The Court emphasised that s 137 requires a careful weighing of competing interests, and that the trial judge's assessment in this instance was sound.

The appeal was dismissed.