Citation: R v Williams (No. 8) [2025] NSWSC 1352
Court: Supreme Court of New South Wales
Date: 12 November 2025
Judge(s): Lonergan J
Background
This decision arises from an ongoing criminal trial in the Supreme Court, at a late stage before closing addresses and summing-up. The trial had commenced with 15 jurors empanelled, a common practice in lengthy proceedings to guard against attrition.
During the trial, one juror sent a note to the court disclosing a recent diagnosis of severe sleep apnoea. The juror stated that concentration had become difficult and that the condition required repeated clinic visits.
The court raised the note with counsel for both the Crown and the accused before determining how to proceed.
Legal Issues
- Whether the juror's sleep apnoea diagnosis and resulting difficulty concentrating constituted a sufficient ground for discretionary discharge under s 53B(d) of the Jury Act 1977 (NSW)
- Whether the trial could lawfully continue with 13 jurors following the discharge
Decision
Lonergan J questioned the juror in open court to confirm the diagnosis and the concentration difficulties described in the note. The defence had suggested that, in the absence of a medical certificate, further questioning might be warranted to determine whether the juror was actually experiencing difficulty. Her Honour considered the juror's own statement sufficiently clear on that point, and the in-court questioning satisfied any residual uncertainty.
Her Honour found that the juror's concentration difficulties arising from sleep apnoea fell within s 53B(d) of the Jury Act 1977 (NSW), which permits discretionary discharge where there is a reason affecting a juror's ability to perform the functions of a juror. The juror was accordingly discharged.
With the jury reduced to 13, her Honour was satisfied that the trial could continue under s 22 of the Jury Act 1977 (NSW). The court noted the late stage of proceedings, with only a small number of witnesses remaining before addresses and summing-up, as a relevant consideration in that assessment.
Orders Made
- The juror was discharged pursuant to s 53B(d) of the Jury Act 1977 (NSW).
- The trial was directed to continue with a jury of 13 persons pursuant to s 22 of the Jury Act 1977 (NSW).
Key Takeaways
- Under s 53B(d) of the Jury Act 1977 (NSW), a juror may be discretionarily discharged where a medical condition affects their ability to perform juror functions; a diagnosis of severe sleep apnoea causing concentration difficulties satisfied this threshold.
- A juror's own written statement describing difficulty concentrating can be sufficient basis for discharge without a formal medical certificate, particularly where the court verifies the position through direct questioning.
- The Supreme Court confirmed that s 22 of the Jury Act 1977 (NSW) permits a trial to continue with fewer than the original number of jurors, with the late stage of proceedings being a relevant contextual factor.
- Empanelling more than the minimum number of jurors at the outset of a long trial is recognised as a mechanism to absorb attrition of this kind, and the Crown relied on that feature in supporting the trial's continuation.
- No error or controversy arose from the court asking the juror questions directly before making the discharge determination, indicating that brief judicial inquiry is an available tool when the basis for discharge requires clarification.
Legislation and Cases Referenced
Legislation:
- Jury Act 1977 (NSW), s 22 (continuation of trial with reduced jury)
- Jury Act 1977 (NSW), s 53B(d) (discretionary discharge of a juror)
Cases cited: None cited in the judgment.