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 rape. The central dispute concerned the admissibility of certain evidence and the fairness of the trial process.

The High Court was required to determine whether the trial judge had erred in admitting evidence of the applicant's prior sexual history, which was alleged to be relevant to the issue of consent. Further, the Court had to consider whether the summing up by the trial judge to the jury was adequate and fair, particularly in relation to the directions on consent and the use of the disputed evidence.

The Court reasoned that the admission of evidence of prior sexual history, in the absence of a clear statutory basis or compelling common law exception, risked unfairly prejudicing the accused. Brennan, Dawson, Toohey, Gaudron and McHugh JJ held that the evidence was inadmissible as it did not fall within any recognised exception to the general rule against admitting evidence of a party's bad character or prior misconduct. They emphasised that the probative value of such evidence, in relation to the issue of consent in the specific circumstances of the case, was outweighed by its prejudicial effect. The Court also found that the summing up contained deficiencies that may have led the jury to misunderstand the relevant legal principles.

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