Watson v R

In Watson v R, the appellant sought leave to appeal against the decision of the trial judge to discharge the entire jury following the close of evidence in a murder trial. The Crown had applied to discharge the jury due to a risk of a substantial miscarriage of justice, a motion that the accused opposed. The trial judge, however, discharged the entire jury, leading to the appellant's application for leave to appeal this decision. The legal issues before the court were whether the trial judge was correct in forming the opinion that there was a risk of a substantial miscarriage of justice, the standard of appellate review applicable in such cases, and the factual correctness of the trial judge's findings regarding alleged breaches by jurors of the trial judge’s directions.

The court examined the trial judge's decision to discharge the jury, noting that the trial judge must have had a reasonable apprehension that there was a risk of a substantial miscarriage of justice. The court reviewed the trial judge's findings in light of the standard of appellate review, which required an examination of whether the trial judge's findings were open to him or her. The court identified factual errors in the trial judge’s reasoning concerning the alleged breaches by jurors of the trial judge’s directions. The court also considered whether these alleged breaches were significant enough to warrant the discharge of the entire jury and whether they occurred on numerous occasions. The materiality of any alleged breaches was a crucial aspect of the court's review.

Ultimately, the court found that the trial judge's decision to discharge the jury was not supported by the evidence. The factual errors in the trial judge's findings, coupled with the lack of materiality in the alleged breaches, led to the conclusion that the trial judge's decision was not open to him or her. Consequently, the application for leave to appeal was granted, and the case was remitted to the trial court for a new trial.