Roy v O'Neill [2020] HCA 45

HIGH COURT OF AUSTRALIA

KIEFEL CJ,

BELL, GAGELER, KEANE AND EDELMAN JJ

AILEEN ROY APPELLANT

AND

JULIE O'NEILL RESPONDENT

Roy v O'Neill

[2020] HCA 45

Date of Hearing: 8 September 2020

Date of Judgment: 9 December 2020

D2/2020

ORDER

Appeal dismissed.

On appeal from the Supreme Court of the Northern Territory

Representation

P R Boulten SC with P D Coleridge for the appellant (instructed by North Australian Aboriginal Justice Agency)

J T Gleeson SC with T J Moses for the respondent (instructed by Director of Public Prosecutions (NT))

Notice: This copy of the Court's Reasons for Judgment is subject to formal revision prior to publication in the Commonwealth Law Reports.

CATCHWORDS

Roy v O'Neill

Evidence – Admissibility – Trespass – Where appellant charged with breach of Domestic Violence Order ("DVO") – Where DVO included condition that appellant not remain in her partner's presence while intoxicated – Where police attended unit occupied by appellant and her partner for purpose of DVO check – Where police engaged in wider proactive policing operation – Where police knocked on front door and asked appellant to come to door for DVO check – Where police observed signs of intoxication and requested appellant submit to breath test – Where breath test positive for alcohol – Whether evidence of breath test lawfully obtained – Whether police trespassed – Whether common law implied licence permitted police to approach unit and knock – Whether lawful purpose to attend unit.

Words and phrases – "breath test", "coercive powers", "common law implied licence", "Domestic Violence Order", "implied licence to enter private property", "interference with an occupier's possession", "lawful communication with an occupier", "lawful purpose", "police", "proactive policing", "trespass".

Police Administration Act (NT), s 126(2A).