Blanchette & Anor v The Queen

The applicants, Blanchette and another, appealed to the High Court of Australia against their convictions for conspiracy to import a commercial quantity of heroin. The Crown contended that the applicants had conspired with a third party, Mr. Kanaan, to import the heroin. The central issue on appeal was whether the evidence presented by the Crown was sufficient to establish the existence of a conspiracy between the applicants and Mr. Kanaan, or whether the evidence merely showed that the applicants had acted independently of Mr. Kanaan, or that Mr. Kanaan had acted independently of the applicants.

The High Court was required to determine whether the trial judge had erred in law by directing the jury that they could find the applicants guilty of conspiracy if they were satisfied beyond reasonable doubt that the applicants had conspired with each other, or with Mr. Kanaan, or with some other person or persons unknown. The applicants argued that this direction was too broad and that the Crown had failed to prove a conspiracy involving Mr. Kanaan, which was the specific conspiracy alleged in the indictment.

McHugh and Kirby JJ, in their joint judgment, held that the jury's verdict of guilty could not stand. They reasoned that the indictment alleged a conspiracy between the applicants and Mr. Kanaan, and that the evidence did not establish such a conspiracy. While there was evidence that the applicants may have engaged in some form of criminal activity, and that Mr. Kanaan was also involved in criminal activity, there was no evidence to demonstrate that the applicants and Mr. Kanaan had reached an agreement to import heroin. The trial judge's direction, by allowing the jury to convict on a conspiracy with unknown persons, effectively permitted a conviction on a charge not particularised in the indictment, thereby creating a substantial miscarriage of justice.

Consequently, the High Court allowed the appeal, quashed the convictions, and ordered that the applicants be discharged.