Kinghorn v Commonwealth Director of Public Prosecutions; Kinghorn v Commissioner of Taxation

The High Court of Australia heard appeals in two matters, *Kinghorn v Commonwealth Director of Public Prosecutions* and *Kinghorn v Commissioner of Taxation*, brought by Mr Kinghorn. The appeals concerned the validity of search warrants issued under the *Proceeds of Crime Act 2002* (Cth) and the *Crimes Act 1914* (Cth) respectively, and the admissibility of evidence obtained pursuant to those warrants.

The central legal issues before the High Court were whether the search warrants were validly issued, and if not, whether the evidence obtained should have been admitted. Specifically, the Court considered whether the applications for the warrants sufficiently particularised the suspected offences and the places to be searched, and whether the issuing officers had reasonable grounds to believe that the information sought would afford evidence of, or otherwise be relevant to, the commission of an indictable offence. The Court also examined the scope of the discretion to admit evidence obtained in contravention of a law.

The High Court held that the search warrants were invalid. Their Honours found that the applications for the warrants lacked the necessary particularity regarding the suspected offences and the places to be searched, failing to meet the requirements of the relevant legislation. Consequently, the evidence obtained pursuant to these invalid warrants was inadmissible. The Court affirmed the principle that evidence obtained in contravention of a law should generally be excluded, particularly where the contravention is significant and impacts fundamental rights, such as the right to privacy and security of property.

The appeals were allowed, and the orders of the lower courts admitting the evidence were set aside.