Grosser v SA Director of Public Prosecuitions

The case of *Grosser v SA Director of Public Prosecutions* concerned an appeal to the High Court of Australia by Mr Grosser against a decision of the Supreme Court of South Australia. The dispute arose from Mr Grosser's conviction for an offence under the *Controlled Substances Act 1984* (SA). The core of the appeal related to the admissibility of evidence obtained through a search of Mr Grosser's property.

The High Court was required to determine whether the evidence obtained from the search was admissible, notwithstanding that the search warrant was executed by a police officer who was not authorised to do so under the relevant legislation. Specifically, the court had to consider the effect of the defect in the execution of the warrant on the validity of the search and the admissibility of the evidence seized.

In their joint judgment, Kirby and Hayne JJ held that the evidence was admissible. Their Honours reasoned that the defect in the execution of the warrant, while rendering the search technically unlawful, did not automatically render the evidence inadmissible. The court applied the principle that the admissibility of evidence obtained in breach of a statutory provision is a matter for the court's discretion, to be exercised by weighing the probative value of the evidence against the undesirability of admitting evidence obtained unlawfully. In this instance, the court found that the illegality was minor and did not warrant the exclusion of the evidence, particularly given its significant probative value in proving the offence.