Stewart v The Queen; Piper v The Queen

These proceedings before the High Court of Australia concerned applications for special leave to appeal by the applicants, Stewart and Piper. The applicants sought to challenge decisions of the Full Court of the Supreme Court of Victoria.

The central legal issue was whether the Full Court had erred in its interpretation and application of the principles established by this Court in *Domican* regarding the admissibility of evidence. Specifically, the applicants contended that the trial judge failed to properly exercise discretion to exclude evidence where its prejudicial effect outweighed its probative value, and that the Full Court's judgment was demonstrably wrong in its articulation of these principles.

The applicants argued that the trial judge did not adequately consider the discretion to exclude evidence if its prejudicial effect outweighed its probative value, or if the evidence was "irrationally impressive." They submitted that the Full Court's reasoning, particularly in certain sentences of its joint judgment, was contrary to the unambiguous statements in *Domican*. The applicants also pointed to the Crown's submissions as suggesting a misunderstanding of the Full Court's holding, further highlighting the potential for an erroneous proposition to be established as authority. The discretion to exclude evidence was sought to be activated on two bases: unfairness to the accused due to the circumstances surrounding the viewing of suspects, and the balancing of prejudicial effect against probative value.