H v The Queen

In *H v The Queen*, the High Court of Australia considered an appeal by the applicant, H, against his conviction for a sexual offence. The dispute concerned the admissibility of certain evidence during H's trial.

The central legal issue before the High Court was whether the trial judge had erred in admitting evidence of H's prior sexual misconduct. This involved determining whether the probative value of this evidence, in demonstrating H's propensity to commit such offences, outweighed its prejudicial effect on the jury.

The High Court, comprising Gleeson CJ and Callinan J, reasoned that evidence of prior sexual misconduct is generally inadmissible because it carries a significant risk of unfair prejudice. However, such evidence may be admitted if it possesses a sufficient degree of relevance to a fact in issue in the current proceedings, beyond merely establishing a propensity. In this instance, the Court found that the evidence of prior misconduct was not sufficiently probative of any fact in issue in the trial and therefore its admission was an error. The Court allowed the appeal, quashed the conviction, and ordered a new trial.