Presley v The Director of Public Prosecutions for the State of South Australia

The High Court of Australia heard an appeal from the Supreme Court of South Australia concerning the admissibility of evidence obtained through a covert recording. The appellant, Mr. Presley, sought to challenge the Director of Public Prosecutions' decision to prosecute him, arguing that the evidence relied upon was obtained unlawfully and should therefore be excluded.

The central legal issue before the High Court was whether the evidence obtained by police through a covert recording, made without a warrant and in circumstances where the appellant had a reasonable expectation of privacy, was admissible in subsequent criminal proceedings. This involved considering the application of the common law exclusionary rule and the principles governing the admission of illegally or improperly obtained evidence.

The High Court, in a joint judgment, affirmed the principles established in *Bunning v Cross* and *Ridgeway v The Queen*. Their Honours held that the common law exclusionary rule permits the exclusion of evidence obtained illegally or improperly if its admission would be unfair to the accused. In this instance, the court found that the covert recording was made in circumstances that infringed upon the appellant's reasonable expectation of privacy, and that the admission of this evidence would be unfair. Consequently, the appeal was allowed, and the evidence was excluded.