Ousley v The Queen

The High Court of Australia considered an appeal from a decision of the Supreme Court of Victoria concerning the validity of warrants issued under s 4A of the *Listening Devices Act 1969* (Vic). The appellant, Ousley, sought to challenge the admissibility of evidence obtained pursuant to these warrants, arguing they were invalid.

The central legal issues before the High Court were whether warrants issued by a judge of a superior court under the Act were amenable to collateral review, whether such warrants must disclose jurisdiction on their face, and if a partial disclosure of jurisdiction could be used as evidence that the issuing judge failed to take into account required considerations, thereby rendering the warrant invalid. The Court also considered the validity of rule 7.05 of the *Criminal Appeals and Procedures Rules 1988* (Vic).

The High Court held that warrants issued under s 4A of the *Listening Devices Act 1969* (Vic) by a judge of a superior court are not amenable to collateral review. The Court reasoned that the Act confers power on judges of superior courts to issue warrants, and in the absence of any statutory provision to the contrary, the exercise of such a power by a judge of a superior court is presumed to be valid. The Court further held that a warrant issued by a judge of a superior court does not need to disclose jurisdiction on its face, and a partial disclosure of jurisdiction does not render the warrant invalid or provide evidence of a failure to consider required matters. The Court found rule 7.05 of the *Criminal Appeals and Procedures Rules 1988* (Vic) to be valid.

The appeal was dismissed.