Korgbara v The Queen

The High Court of Australia heard an appeal from a decision of the Supreme Court of New South Wales in the matter of *Korgbara v The Queen*. The appellant, Korgbara, had been convicted of a number of offences, including armed robbery and assault occasioning actual bodily harm. The appeal concerned the admissibility of certain evidence obtained from the appellant.

The central legal issue before the High Court was whether the evidence obtained from the appellant, specifically a confession and items seized from his home, was admissible in light of the circumstances of his arrest and detention. The appellant argued that the evidence was obtained in contravention of his rights and should have been excluded by the trial judge.

The High Court considered the principles governing the admissibility of evidence obtained in contravention of statutory provisions and the common law. It examined the application of s 138 of the *Evidence Act 1995* (NSW), which allows for the admission of improperly or illegally obtained evidence if the desirability of admitting the evidence outweighs the undesirability of admitting it. The Court analysed the factors relevant to this balancing exercise, including the probative value of the evidence, the importance of the evidence, the nature of the contravention, and whether the contravention was deliberate or accidental. The Court ultimately found that the trial judge had erred in admitting the evidence, as the undesirability of admitting evidence obtained in contravention of the appellant's rights outweighed its desirability.

The High Court allowed the appeal, quashed the convictions, and remitted the matter to the Supreme Court of New South Wales for a retrial.