P v the Queen; Ex Parte Attorney-General of Queensland

The case of *P v the Queen; Ex Parte Attorney-General of Queensland* concerned an application by the Attorney-General of Queensland for leave to appeal against a decision of the Court of Appeal of Queensland. The central dispute involved the interpretation and application of provisions within the *Criminal Code Act 1899* (Qld) relating to the admissibility of evidence obtained by police during an interrogation. The application was heard by McHugh and Hayne JJ of the High Court of Australia.

The primary legal issue before the High Court was whether the Court of Appeal had erred in quashing a conviction on the basis that certain evidence, obtained from the appellant during police questioning, should have been excluded. This required the Court to consider the principles governing the admissibility of confessional evidence, particularly where the accused may have been induced to confess by threats or promises, or where the confession was not voluntary. The Court also had to determine the proper application of the exclusionary rules within the *Criminal Code* in such circumstances.

McHugh and Hayne JJ reasoned that the Court of Appeal had misapplied the relevant provisions of the *Criminal Code*. Their Honours emphasised that the question of whether a confession was voluntary is a question of fact for the trial judge, and that the Code did not mandate the exclusion of evidence merely because it was obtained in circumstances that might be considered unfair, unless those circumstances rendered the confession involuntary. The Court affirmed that the focus of the exclusionary rule was on the voluntariness of the confession, and that the Court of Appeal had incorrectly broadened the scope of the rule.

The High Court granted leave to appeal, allowed the appeal, and set aside the order of the Court of Appeal of Queensland. The conviction of the appellant was accordingly restored.