The Queen v Jolly

The Queen (appellant) appealed to the High Court of Australia against the decision of the Supreme Court of Queensland, which had allowed an appeal by Mr Jolly (respondent) against his conviction for a number of offences. The dispute concerned the admissibility of certain evidence obtained by police during an investigation.

The central legal issue before the High Court was whether the evidence, which included statements made by the respondent to police and documents seized from his premises, had been obtained in contravention of the *Criminal Code* (Qld) and, if so, whether that evidence should have been excluded from use at trial. Specifically, the court considered the application of section 590A of the *Criminal Code*, which deals with the admissibility of evidence obtained in contravention of the law.

The High Court, comprising Gleeson CJ and McHugh J, held that the Supreme Court of Queensland had erred in its application of section 590A. Their Honours reasoned that while the evidence may have been obtained in contravention of the *Criminal Code*, the Supreme Court had failed to properly consider the discretion afforded to the trial judge under that section to admit such evidence if it was relevant and its probative value outweighed any prejudice. The High Court emphasised that the purpose of section 590A was not to automatically exclude all evidence obtained unlawfully, but rather to allow for a balancing exercise.

Consequently, the High Court allowed the appeal, set aside the order of the Supreme Court of Queensland, and remitted the matter to the Supreme Court for re-hearing according to law.