For inherently vague offences such as making a false statement under oath, a search warrant under s 117 of the Police Administration Act (NT) that merely names the offence and cites the statutory section, without identifying who is alleged to have committed the offence or when, where and in what circumstances, will be invalid on its face for failure to comply with s 117(5)(a). A party claiming legal professional privilege over seized documents must adduce admissible evidence establishing the factual basis for the claim; a court will not inspect documents to determine privilege where the claimant has failed to provide such evidence and the opposing party would be deprived of any opportunity to test the claim.
The full text is available to signed-in members, including the 3 later cases that cite this judgment.