When conducting the s 138 balancing exercise, the degree of causal connection between each piece of evidence and the original impropriety is a legitimate consideration, and it is permissible for a judge to reach different outcomes for different pieces of evidence depending on the strength of that connection. Additionally, subsequent police attempts to conceal the consequences of the original impropriety from the court are potentially relevant to the balancing exercise, even though such conduct post-dates the obtaining of the evidence. However, the standard of appellate review remains House v The King, requiring demonstration of error in principle rather than mere disagreement with the outcome.
The full text is available to signed-in members, including the 11 later cases that cite this judgment.
1 of the 11 citing cases carry a classified treatment. How each court treated it is available to signed-in members.