Reza v Summerhill Orchards Ltd

(2013) 37 VR 204; [2013] VSCA 17

Victorian Court of Appeal

Built by Barristers,
For Australian Law.

See how it works

Interrogate

Catchwords

1. Practice and Procedure
2. › Jury trial
3. › Application to discharge jury
4. › Prejudicial statement in closing address
5. › Breach of rule in Browne v Dunn
6. › Whether trial judge's directions sufficient to overcome prejudice
7. › Whether fairness of trial seriously affected
1. Practice and Procedure
2. › Jury trial
3. › Closing address of counsel
4. › Reference to workers' compensation payments
5. › Irrelevant material before jury
6. › Duty of trial judge to ensure fair trial
1. Evidence
2. › Rule in Browne v Dunn
3. › Failure to put allegation to witness
4. › Allegation raised in closing address without evidentiary foundation
5. › Remedial directions by trial judge
1. Appeal
2. › Appeal from refusal to discharge jury
3. › Standard of appellate review
4. › Whether substantial wrong or miscarriage of justice
5. › Considerations relevant to ordering new trial

Quick Take

Where a breach of the rule in Browne v Dunn or exposure to irrelevant material occurs during a jury trial, the question is whether the conduct has seriously affected the proper conduct of a fair trial. A clear, full and authoritative direction by the trial judge, combined with a retraction by the offending counsel, may be sufficient to overcome the prejudice without requiring discharge of the jury. The principles in Balenzuela v De Gail concerning wrongful admission or exclusion of evidence do not apply to such cases.