Matthew Milata andTHE Queen

The High Court of Australia considered an appeal by Matthew Milata against his conviction for murder. The dispute concerned the admissibility of certain evidence during his trial in the Supreme Court of Western Australia.

The central legal issue before the High Court was whether the evidence of a police interview conducted with Mr Milata, which was admitted at his trial, was obtained in contravention of the *Criminal Investigation Act 2006* (WA) and, if so, whether it should have been excluded under s 138 of the *Evidence Act 1995* (WA). Specifically, the Court had to determine if the interview was conducted in accordance with the requirements of the *Criminal Investigation Act 2006* (WA) regarding the recording of interviews and the provision of information to the suspect.

The High Court, comprising French CJ and Gageler J, found that the police interview with Mr Milata was conducted in contravention of the *Criminal Investigation Act 2006* (WA). The Court reasoned that the Act imposed mandatory requirements for the recording of interviews and the informing of suspects of their rights, which had not been met. Applying the principles of s 138 of the *Evidence Act 1995* (WA), which governs the exclusion of improperly or illegally obtained evidence, the Court concluded that the admission of the interview evidence had occasioned a substantial miscarriage of justice.

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