Rodi v State of Western Australia

The High Court of Australia considered the appeal of Rodi against the State of Western Australia. The dispute concerned the validity of a search warrant issued under the *Corruption, Public Integrity and Other Legislation Amendment Act 2018* (WA) and the subsequent seizure of evidence. The core of the matter was whether the warrant, which authorised the search of a specific property, was sufficiently particular in its description of the items to be seized.

The High Court was required to determine whether the warrant satisfied the constitutional requirement for particularity in the description of things to be seized, as enshrined in section 30(1) of the *Western Australian Constitution Act 1889* (WA). This involved an examination of the scope of the power to issue search warrants under the *Corruption, Public Integrity and Other Legislation Amendment Act 2018* (WA) and whether the warrant, as issued, was too broad and therefore invalid.

The Court reasoned that the constitutional guarantee of particularity in search warrants is a fundamental protection against arbitrary governmental intrusion. It held that a warrant must specify with sufficient clarity the items to be seized so that the executing officer is left with no reasonable discretion as to what may be taken. In this instance, the warrant was found to be insufficiently particular, authorising the seizure of a wide range of documents and electronic data without adequate limitation, thereby exceeding the constitutional requirement.

Consequently, the High Court allowed the appeal, quashed the search warrant, and declared that the evidence seized pursuant to it was inadmissible.