Stanley v Director of Public Prosecutions (NSW) & Anor

The High Court of Australia considered an appeal by Stanley against the Director of Public Prosecutions (NSW) and another party. The dispute concerned the validity of a search warrant issued under the *Law Enforcement (Powers and Responsibilities) Act 2002* (NSW) and the subsequent seizure of evidence. Stanley challenged the warrant on the grounds that it was not supported by sufficient evidence to establish reasonable suspicion that an offence had been, or was likely to be, committed.

The central legal issue before the High Court was whether the evidence presented to the issuing officer established a reasonable suspicion for the purposes of authorising the search warrant under section 47 of the *Law Enforcement (Powers and Responsibilities) Act 2002* (NSW). This required the Court to consider the nature and quality of the information that must be before an issuing officer to satisfy the threshold of reasonable suspicion.

The High Court held that the issuing officer must have a state of mind that is more than a mere hunch or guess, but it does not require certainty or proof beyond reasonable doubt. The suspicion must be based on grounds that are reasonable, meaning that there must be some factual basis for the suspicion. In this instance, the Court found that the information before the issuing officer did not provide a sufficient factual basis to form a reasonable suspicion that an offence had been, or was likely to be, committed. Consequently, the search warrant was invalid.

The High Court ordered that the appeal be allowed and the evidence seized under the invalid warrant be excluded.