Hay v The Queen; Webb v The Queen

These proceedings before the High Court of Australia concerned applications for special leave to appeal by Michael Peter Webb and another applicant, Hay. The applicants sought to challenge decisions of the Court of Criminal Appeal of South Australia concerning the discharge of a jury during their respective trials. The central dispute revolved around whether various matters that arose during the trials, including publicity and the conduct of a juror, warranted the discharge of the jury and the commencement of a new trial.

The legal issues before the High Court were whether the trial judges erred in refusing to discharge the jury, and consequently, whether the applicants were denied a fair trial. Specifically, the applicants argued that a combination of factors, including media coverage and the actions of a juror who provided flowers to the mother of the deceased, created a situation where an impartial jury could no longer be assured. This, they contended, meant that the jury was unable to consider the evidence impartially, thereby undermining the appearance and reality of justice.

The applicants' submissions focused on the cumulative effect of these matters. They argued that while individual incidents might not have been sufficient to warrant a discharge, their combined impact rendered the jury incapable of delivering a fair verdict. The act of a juror providing flowers, though potentially well-intentioned, was presented as evidence of sympathy towards a third party, which could imply adverse feelings towards the accused. This, coupled with other preceding issues such as publicity, was argued to have prejudiced the jury's ability to maintain impartiality, leading to a substantial basis for discharging the jury and ordering a retrial.