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 central dispute concerned the admissibility of certain evidence during H's trial, specifically evidence relating to his prior sexual history.

The High Court was required to determine whether the trial judge had erred in admitting evidence of H's prior sexual conduct with the complainant, which was presented as evidence of a propensity to commit the offence charged. The key legal issue was whether this evidence was unfairly prejudicial to the applicant and therefore inadmissible under the rules of evidence, particularly concerning the exclusion of evidence of character or disposition where its probative value is outweighed by its prejudicial effect.

The Court reasoned that the admission of evidence of prior sexual conduct, when used to establish a propensity to commit the offence charged, carries a significant risk of unfair prejudice. Such evidence can lead a jury to infer guilt based on past behaviour rather than on the evidence directly relating to the offence in question. The High Court held that the trial judge had erred in admitting this evidence, as its prejudicial effect substantially outweighed its probative value. The Court emphasised that evidence of prior sexual conduct should only be admitted if it possesses a specific, relevant probative value beyond merely suggesting a disposition to commit the offence.

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