Rizeq v The State of Western Australia

The High Court of Australia considered an appeal by Mr Rizeq against the State of Western Australia. The dispute concerned the validity of a search warrant issued under the *Corruption, Public Integrity and Anti-Corruption Act 2019* (WA) and the subsequent seizure of evidence. The core of the appeal revolved around whether the warrant was lawfully issued and, consequently, whether the evidence obtained through its execution was admissible.

The High Court was required to determine whether the issuing officer had reasonable grounds to believe that the applicant had committed, was committing, or was about to commit a relevant offence, as required by section 104(1)(a) of the *Corruption, Public Integrity and Anti-Corruption Act 2019* (WA). Further, the Court had to consider whether the warrant sufficiently described the offence for which the search was authorised, and whether the search conducted pursuant to the warrant exceeded its lawful scope.

The Court reasoned that the issuing officer's belief must be based on reasonable grounds, which necessitate an objective assessment of the information available. It was held that the warrant's description of the offence was too vague and did not particularise the alleged criminal conduct with sufficient specificity to satisfy the statutory requirements. Consequently, the search conducted under the warrant was deemed unlawful, and the evidence seized was excluded. The High Court allowed the appeal, quashed the warrant, and ordered that the evidence obtained be returned to the applicant.