Griffiths v The Queen

In *Griffiths v The Queen*, the High Court of Australia considered an appeal by the applicant, Griffiths, against his conviction for murder. The dispute centred on the admissibility of evidence obtained through a search of the applicant's property, which was conducted without a warrant. The Crown sought to rely on this evidence to prove the applicant's guilt.

The primary legal issue before the High Court was whether the evidence obtained from the warrantless search was admissible, notwithstanding the absence of a warrant. This involved a consideration of the common law principles governing the admissibility of illegally or improperly obtained evidence, and whether any exceptions to the exclusionary rule applied in this instance. The Court also had to determine the proper application of the *Judiciary Act 1903* (Cth) in relation to the admission of such evidence.

The High Court, in a joint judgment, held that the evidence obtained from the warrantless search was inadmissible. Their Honours applied the principle that evidence obtained in contravention of the law, even if relevant, should generally be excluded unless the probative value of the evidence outweighs the impropriety of its acquisition. In this case, the Court found that the Crown had failed to establish a sufficient justification for the warrantless search, and therefore the evidence should have been excluded. The Court emphasised that the onus was on the prosecution to demonstrate why the evidence should be admitted despite the illegality.

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