R v Snow

This case concerns an appeal to the High Court of Australia following a conviction for trading with the enemy in the Supreme Court of South Australia. The accused, Francis Hugh Snow, was convicted on one count. The trial judge initially reserved a case for the Full Court of South Australia. Following an appeal to the High Court, the case was remitted for amendment to include certain documentary evidence. Upon reargument before the Full Court, the trial judge further amended the case, admitting that he had misinterpreted evidence when directing the jury, leading to a potential misdirection regarding an attempt to trade with the enemy. This point had not been raised during the trial.

The legal issues before the High Court were whether the trial judge had the jurisdiction to amend the reserved case to include a new question concerning a misinterpretation of evidence that was not raised at trial, and whether, in light of this misinterpretation, the jury's verdict could stand. The Crown argued that the judge lacked jurisdiction to amend the case at that stage and that the misinterpretation was not a material misdirection.

The Full Court of South Australia, by majority, held that the trial judge's direction, based on his misinterpretation of the cablegram, was wrong and consequently ordered a new trial. The High Court, in refusing special leave to appeal, did not express an opinion on the substantive legal points raised.