Larry Cavanaugh - a Pseudonym v The Queen

The High Court of Australia considered an appeal by Larry Cavanaugh (a pseudonym) against his conviction for a serious criminal offence. The dispute concerned the admissibility of certain evidence during the trial, which the appellant argued should have been excluded.

The central legal issue before the High Court was whether the evidence in question was obtained in contravention of the *Broadcasting of Parliamentary Proceedings Act 1946* (Cth) and, if so, whether its admission at trial was an error that necessitated setting aside the conviction. The Court had to determine the proper application of the exclusionary rule in circumstances where evidence is obtained in breach of statutory provisions.

The High Court reasoned that the *Broadcasting of Parliamentary Proceedings Act* does not create a statutory bar to the admissibility of evidence obtained in contravention of its provisions. Instead, the Court affirmed that the common law exclusionary rule, which permits a judge to exclude evidence obtained improperly or unfairly, remains the governing principle. The Court held that the admission of the evidence was not an error, as the trial judge had properly exercised their discretion under the common law to admit it, having regard to the circumstances of its obtaining and its probative value. The appeal was therefore dismissed.