Kamm v The Queen

The case of *Kamm v The Queen* concerned an appeal to the High Court of Australia. The appellant, Kamm, had been convicted of a criminal offence. The central dispute revolved around the admissibility of certain evidence during his trial.

The High Court was required to determine whether the evidence in question, which had been obtained by police, was admissible under the *Uniform Evidence Law* (UEL). Specifically, the court had to consider the application of provisions relating to the admissibility of improperly or illegally obtained evidence, and the discretion of the trial judge to exclude such evidence.

The High Court analysed the relevant provisions of the UEL, particularly concerning the circumstances under which evidence obtained in contravention of an Australian law might be admitted. The court affirmed that the admissibility of such evidence is not automatic and requires careful consideration of the circumstances of its obtaining and its probative value. The judges applied established principles regarding judicial discretion to exclude evidence where its probative value is outweighed by the danger of unfair prejudice to the accused, or where its admission would be otherwise contrary to the public interest. The court ultimately found that the evidence was admissible.