Smethurst & Anor v Commissioner of Police & Anor

The High Court of Australia considered an appeal concerning the validity of search warrants issued under the *Crimes Act 1914* (Cth) and the admissibility of evidence obtained pursuant to those warrants. The applicants, Smethurst and another, sought to challenge the legality of the search of their premises and the subsequent seizure of documents and electronic devices, arguing that the warrants were invalidly issued. The Commissioner of Police and another were the respondents.

The central legal issues before the High Court were whether the warrants were properly authorised under section 3L of the *Crimes Act 1914* and, if not, what the consequences were for the admissibility of the evidence seized. Specifically, the Court had to determine whether the issuing officer had a sufficient evidentiary basis to be satisfied that there were reasonable grounds to believe the premises were related to the commission of a federal offence, and whether the warrants themselves sufficiently particularised the items to be seized.

The High Court reasoned that the issuing officer must have a reasonable belief that the premises are "related to" the commission of a federal offence, which requires more than a mere possibility. The Court found that the information before the issuing officer did not establish a sufficient nexus between the premises and the alleged federal offences. Consequently, the warrants were held to be invalidly issued. The Court further considered the application of section 138 of the *Evidence Act 1995* (Cth), which governs the exclusion of improperly or illegally obtained evidence, and concluded that the evidence obtained should be excluded due to the illegality of the search.

The High Court allowed the appeal, quashed the search warrants, and ordered that the evidence obtained pursuant to those warrants be excluded.