R v Far

The case of *R v Far* concerned an appeal to the High Court of Australia by the applicant, Far, against his conviction for a number of offences. The dispute centred on the admissibility of evidence obtained through a search of the applicant's mobile phone.

The High Court was required to determine whether the search of the applicant's mobile phone, conducted without a warrant, was lawful under the *Crimes Act 1914* (Cth) and, consequently, whether the evidence derived from that search should have been excluded from the trial. A key issue was the interpretation of the powers of a constable to search electronic devices under the Act.

The Court reasoned that the power to search a person under the *Crimes Act* did not extend to the contents of a mobile phone, as such a device was not a "thing" in the ordinary sense that could be searched. The judges applied the principle of statutory interpretation that powers conferred by statute must be exercised within their express terms, and that implied powers should not be readily assumed, particularly where they involve significant intrusions into privacy.

The High Court allowed the appeal, quashed the conviction, and ordered a new trial.