R v AI, AD and JR

The Court of Appeal considered an appeal concerning the severance of an indictment against three accused, AI, AD, and JR, who were jointly charged with an offence. The Chief Justice had previously ordered separate trials for each accused, a decision that was now under review.

The central legal issue before the Court of Appeal was whether the Chief Justice erred in severing the indictment and ordering separate trials. This required the court to consider the principles governing the joinder and severance of charges against multiple accused, particularly when there are significant differences in the evidence against each. The court also had to determine the circumstances under which an appeal against an interlocutory order severing an indictment would be permitted.

The Court of Appeal reasoned that joint trials are generally favoured when accused persons are involved in the same criminal enterprise, share common witnesses, have performed acts in preparation together, or were all present for the incident in question. While acknowledging that differences in the case against each accused can be a factor, the court found that these differences did not, in this instance, provide a proper basis to sever the indictment. The court emphasised that appeals against interlocutory orders severing an indictment are only permissible in exceptional circumstances. Finding such circumstances to be present, the court allowed the appeal.

Consequently, the Court of Appeal granted leave to appeal, upheld the appeal, and set aside the Chief Justice's orders severing the indictment and directing separate trials for AI, AD, and JR.