R v Kelu; R v Millner (No 2)

In the matter of R v Kelu; R v Millner (No 2), the appellants, Kelu and Millner, challenged their convictions before the High Court. They contended that the trial judge had erred in discharging one of the jurors, leading to the jury being discharged and the trial being aborted. The case revolved around the trial judge's decision to discharge the juror after receiving a note indicating that the juror no longer respected the court officers. The appellants argued that this decision was flawed, as it did not adequately consider the juror's ability to perform their functions impartially.

The primary legal issue before the court was whether the trial judge had correctly exercised his discretion in discharging the juror. The court was required to determine if the juror's expressed lack of respect for the court officers was sufficient to warrant their discharge, considering the potential impact on the juror's impartiality. The appellants' argument hinged on whether the trial judge should have further inquired into the juror's capacity to remain impartial despite the noted issue.

The court held that the trial judge's decision to discharge the juror was correct. The High Court found that the note from the juror indicated a level of disrespect that could affect the juror's ability to perform their functions impartially. This was a reasonable basis for the trial judge to conclude that the juror should be discharged. The court emphasised the importance of maintaining the impartiality of jurors and upheld the trial judge's discretion in this matter. The court concluded that the trial judge did not err in discharging the juror, leading to the jury being discharged and the trial being aborted. The appellants' convictions were upheld.