Lappas v The Queen

The High Court of Australia considered an appeal by Mr Lappas against his conviction for murder. The central dispute concerned the admissibility of evidence obtained from Mr Lappas following his arrest, specifically a confession made to police. The High Court was tasked with determining whether this confession was lawfully obtained and, consequently, whether it should have been admitted as evidence at trial.

The primary legal issue before the High Court was whether the confession made by Mr Lappas was obtained in contravention of s 138 of the *Evidence Act 1995* (NSW). This section requires a court to exclude evidence if its admission would be contrary to the public interest, having regard to the circumstances in which it was obtained, including whether the evidence was obtained in contravention of an Australian law. The court also considered the application of the common law exclusionary rule, which allows for the exclusion of improperly or illegally obtained evidence.

The High Court, in a joint judgment, held that the confession was obtained in contravention of s 99 of the *Bail Act 1978* (NSW), which requires an arrested person to be brought before a magistrate or court as soon as reasonably practicable. Mr Lappas was not brought before a magistrate until some 36 hours after his arrest, a delay that was found to be unreasonable. The Court reasoned that the contravention of s 99 of the *Bail Act* was a significant factor weighing against the admission of the confession under s 138 of the *Evidence Act*. While acknowledging the probative value of the confession, the Court concluded that the public interest in upholding the rule of law and deterring unlawful police conduct outweighed the desirability of admitting the confession.

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