Juries Act 1967

The Act organises jury work around a small set of operational concepts and actors whose definitions and duties are spelled out in the text.

• Liability to serve and source population. Liability rests on inclusion in the roll of electors of the ACT (s 9). The dictionary defines the roll of electors as the copy provided to the sheriff under the Electoral Act 1992, s 65(3). Regulations may prescribe categories of disqualified, exempt or claimable‑exempt persons (s 11).

• Jury list, jury roll, jury pool and identifying numbers. The sheriff prepares a jury list at prescribed times (s 19), removes names of known dead or disqualified persons (s 19(2)), and may keep the list electronically (s 19(3)). When a precept issues, the sheriff chooses names randomly from the jury list and prepares a jury roll, and later a jury pool consisting of those actually served and not excused (ss 24(1), 24(4), 27(1)). Each person in the jury pool is allocated a unique identifying number; the sheriff must keep a confidential record of identifying numbers for each jury pool (ss 27(1)(b), 27A(1)-(2)).

• Judicial and sheriff discretion. Judges issue precepts to the sheriff (s 22) and have discretion to excuse jurors (s 14), to permit support (s 16), to order views (s 47), to permit expanded juries (s 31A) and to determine whether a jury may return a majority verdict (s 38) or should be discharged (s 39). The sheriff has operational discretion in selecting names (s 24), substituting names if a chosen person is disqualified or unlikely to be served (s 24(2)), and in administering penalty notices for non‑attendance (s 42B).

• Random selection and empirical identity controls. Names and identifying numbers must be chosen randomly (s 24(3); s 31(1) for the proper officer selecting identifying numbers). If numbers called exhaust without 12 people occupying the jury box, the judge may direct appointment of persons in or near court who are liable to serve; those persons are treated as if returned on the precept and may be challenged (s 31(3)-(4)).

• Challenges and peremptory rights. The Crown and the accused each have eight peremptory challenges at criminal trials, along with unlimited challenges for cause (s 34). Timing is specified , a challenge must be made as the person called approaches and before entering the jury box (s 35). Challenges for cause are tried by the sitting judge (s 36A).

• Number and reduced juries. The default size of a criminal jury is 12 (s 7). A judge may excuse a juror for sufficient cause (s 8(1)). If reduction leaves at least 10 jurors, the trial may continue if the judge so orders and the verdict of the reduced panel is sufficient (s 8(2)). If the number falls below 10, the judge must discharge the jurors and adjourn (s 8(3)(b)).

• Confidentiality and criminalisation of conduct. The Act defines protected information relating to jury deliberations and juror identity and creates offences and penalties for disclosure, solicitation or publication of such information (s 42C). It also creates an offence for a juror making unauthorised inquiries after being sworn (s 42BA), and other conduct offences relevant to jury attendance and behaviour (ss 41-44AB). Some prosecutions under s 42C require written consent of the DPP (s 42C(10)).

• Oaths, interpreters and support persons. The Act prescribes the form of the juror’s oath and affirmation (Schedule 1 part 1.1), and requires interpreters and support persons (when permitted under s 16) to take a statutory oath or affirmation that includes commitments not to participate in deliberations or disclose them except as allowed by law (Schedule 1 parts 1.1A and 1.1B). If the judge directs an interpreter or support person to assist, the common law rule against a non‑juror being present in the jury room is not a relevant bar (s 16(4)(a)), but the presence is limited to assisting that juror (s 16(4)(b)) and requires the non‑juror to take the relevant oath or affirmation (s 16(4)(c)).

• Payments and expenses. Jurors are entitled to sums for attendance and meals as determined by the Minister (ss 49(1)(b)-(2), 51(1)-(2)); these determinations are disallowable instruments (ss 49(3), 51(2)). Jurors may apply for payment of expenses incurred after being sworn if circumstances would have justified excusal had they arisen before swearing; the sheriff considers such applications and a judge may review the sheriff’s decision (s 51A).

These concepts together create an operational architecture: the roll supplies the pool, the sheriff implements random selection and confidentiality, judges exercise case‑by‑case discretion on excusal, support and verdict procedures, and statutory offences and penalties enforce attendance and secrecy.

The Act assigns specific roles and imposes obligations across a range of participants. The primary groups affected, and the provisions that apply to them, are as follows.

• Prospective jurors and jurors. Every person on the ACT roll of electors is, unless disqualified or exempt, liable to serve as a juror (s 9). Jurors must be sworn (s 45) and comply with the conditions of attendance (s 42A). They are forbidden from making unauthorised inquiries after being sworn (s 42BA), must preserve confidentiality of deliberations and, subject to limited exceptions, must not disclose protected information (s 42C). Jurors are entitled to payment for attendance and to make applications for expense reimbursement under s 51A where eligible (ss 51, 51A).

• The sheriff and sheriff’s officers. The sheriff has the operational charge of the jury list (s 19), selecting names randomly in response to a judge’s precept (s 24), preparing the jury roll and pool and allocating identifying numbers (s 27), maintaining confidential records (s 27A), returning the precept and jury pool to the Supreme Court (s 28), and administering notices and penalty processes under s 42B. For part 5, the Act specifically defines “sheriff” to include any person exercising the functions in accordance with the Supreme Court Act 1933, s 52 (s 21).

• Judges and the Supreme Court. Judges issue precepts (s 22), exercise discretion to excuse jurors (s 14), to permit support and interpreters (s 16), to empanel expanded juries (s 31A), to allow majority verdicts under specified conditions (s 38), and to discharge and adjourn jury trials under s 39. Judges also hear applications to review sheriff decisions removing names from the jury roll (s 24(10)-(11)), and reviews under s 26A when the sheriff refuses to withdraw a summons.

• Legal practitioners, prosecution and defence. The prosecution and defence are entitled to inspect the jury pool on the day fixed for trial (s 29(2)). The Crown and the accused each have peremptory challenges and challenges for cause at criminal trials (s 34). The DPP has a gatekeeping role for prosecutions under s 42C, as written consent of the DPP or an authorised delegate is required before instituting a prosecution under that section (s 42C(10)).

• Police. Police officers may be given the jury roll and are permitted to make inquiries to determine disqualification (s 24(4)-(5)); however, information obtained in those inquiries is subject to restrictions on recording and disclosure except where the officer is exercising a function under a law (s 24(6)). The Act indemnifies police acting in good faith on such inquiries from personal civil or criminal liability (s 24(12)).

• Employers and employees. Employers are prohibited from dismissing or otherwise injuring an employee, or altering their position to the employee’s prejudice, because the employee is summoned to serve as a juror (s 44AA(1)). If an employer acts and the elements other than reason are established, the employer bears an evidential onus to prove the action was not because the employee was summoned (s 44AA(2)). The Supreme Court may order remedies including reimbursement for lost salary and reinstatement (s 44AA(3)).

• Interpreters and support persons. Where the judge directs support to enable a juror to properly discharge duties (s 16), an interpreter or support person must swear an oath or affirmation in the forms in Schedule 1 parts 1.1A and 1.1B (s 45A, s 45B). The Act links the definition of support person to the Discrimination Act 1991 (dictionary).

• Minister and Executive. The Minister determines jury payments, meals and allowances (ss 49-51). Those determinations are disallowable instruments and so subject to the Legislative Assembly’s disallowance procedures (s 49(3); s 51(2); note).

• Researchers, media and public. Section 42C defines “protected information” about juries and imposes criminal penalties for disclosing, obtaining, soliciting or publishing such information (ss 42C(2)-(4)). There are enumerated exceptions where disclosure is permitted, including court proceedings, royal commissions, DPP investigations and, crucially, authorisations granted by the Attorney‑General to conduct research into matters relating to juries (ss 42C(5)(e), 42C(6)(d), 42C(7)(a)). A prosecution under s 42C requires written consent of the DPP (s 42C(10)), which limits prosecutorial action on these offences to the DPP’s discretion.

• Other courts and jurisdictions. Section 42C applies to juries in criminal, civil or coronial proceedings in courts of the Territory, the Commonwealth, a State or another Territory (s 42C(1)), so its confidentiality regime operates across jurisdictions.

Taken together, these provisions allocate operational and legal burdens among state actors (sheriff, police, judges, Minister, DPP), private actors (jurors, employers, interpreters, lawyers), and the public (media, researchers). The statute places several choices about discretionary powers , excusal, support, removal of names, prosecution of confidentiality breaches , explicitly within the hands of the sheriff, judge or the DPP.

The Act creates clear, textually defined duties and rights for the main participants. Below are the principal duties and rights organised by role, each with the governing section cited.

Jurors and prospective jurors

• Duty to attend if served with a jury summons, unless valid reason exists (s 41(1)). Non‑attendance without valid reason attracts a maximum penalty of 10 penalty units (s 41(1)). Note that those excused or whose summons has been withdrawn are not subject to s 41(2).
• Duty to remain on court premises until discharged or excused, unless permitted by the sheriff (s 42); leaving without permission attracts up to 10 penalty units.
• Duty to comply with any conditions imposed by judge or sheriff prior to excusal or before being permitted to leave the premises (s 42A), subject to a reasonableness qualification in s 42A(1) and (3). Breach is an offence with a maximum penalty of 10 penalty units (s 42A(1)-(2)).
• Duty to take the juror’s oath or affirmation in open court (s 45; Schedule 1 part 1.1).
• Duty not to make unauthorised inquiries after being sworn for information relating to the trial (s 42BA), an offence that carries a maximum penalty of imprisonment for 2 years (s 42BA(1)). The section lists what “making an inquiry” can include (s 42BA(4)) and excludes inquiries authorised by the court (s 42BA(2)).
• Right to be paid attendance and meal allowances determined by the Minister (ss 49(1)(b), 51(1)-(2)). Those determinations are disallowable instruments (ss 49(3), 51(2)).
• Right to apply for payment of expenses incurred while serving when certain conditions arise after being sworn; the sheriff may grant full or partial payment and the decision may be reviewed by a judge (s 51A).

Sheriff and court officers

• Duty to prepare the jury list at prescribed times and whenever necessary, remove names of dead/disqualified/excused persons known to the sheriff, and maintain an electronic list if desired (s 19(1)-(3), s 19(4)).
• Duty to choose names randomly from the jury list to meet the judge’s precept (s 24(1), (3)); prepare the jury roll and give a copy to a police officer (s 24(4)).
• Duty to accept and act on police inquiries into disqualification, and to remove a person from the jury roll where the sheriff is satisfied the person is a disqualified person or unfit given prior convictions (s 24(5)-(8)); must notify persons removed and provide opportunity to object to a judge (s 24(9)-(11)).
• Duty to keep records of identifying numbers and maintain confidentiality (s 27A(1)-(2)).
• Power to issue notices under s 42B offering an alternative to court proceedings for contraventions of attendance rules, including specifying payment equivalent to 5 penalty units (s 42B(2)).

Judges and the Supreme Court

• Power to issue precepts requiring the sheriff to summon persons (s 22).
• Power to excuse jurors for sufficient reason at any time after a summons is served (s 14).
• Duty to consider and, if appropriate, order reasonable support where inability to discharge duties arises because of limited English or disability, and a duty to direct support where reasonable (s 16(1)-(2)). The judge must consider whether the support imposes disproportionate burden or would inhibit deliberations (s 16(3)).
• Power to empanel expanded juries where appropriate and to apply the Act as if references to 12 jurors were references to the number empanelled (s 31A(1)-(2)); power to select jurors to be discharged randomly to return to 12 for deliberation if more than 12 sit to consider a verdict (s 31A(4)).
• Power to permit majority verdicts for Territory law offences where criteria in s 38(2) are met, and to discharge juries under s 39 when further deliberation is unlikely.
• Power to hear reviews and applications under s 24(10)-(11) (challenge to removal from the jury roll), s 26A (review of sheriff’s refusal to withdraw a summons), and judicial review by a judge of sheriff decisions under s 51A(3).

Prosecution and DPP

• The Crown has entitlement to eight peremptory challenges and unlimited challenges for cause at criminal trials (s 34(1)). The DPP’s written consent is required before instituting a prosecution under s 42C (s 42C(10)).

Employers

• Duty not to dismiss, injure, or alter an employee’s position to the employee’s prejudice because of jury summons (s 44AA(1)). If elements other than motivation are proven, the onus is on the employer to show the action was not because of the summons (s 44AA(2)). If convicted, the Supreme Court may order reimbursement and reinstatement (s 44AA(3)).

Legal practitioners

• Right to inspect or obtain a copy of the jury pool for the trial on the day fixed for the trial (s 29(2)). Rights to exercise peremptory and cause challenges (s 34).

Researchers and the public

• Significant restrictions on use and publication of protected information about jury deliberations and juror identities (s 42C(2)-(4)), with narrow statutory exceptions such as court proceedings, DPP investigations, or express Attorney‑General authorisation for research (s 42C(5)(e), (6)(d), (7)(a)).

Each of these duties and rights is defined by statute. Where the Act provides discretion (for example, s 14 excusing jurors, s 16 support, s 31A expansion of juries, s 24 substitutions and removals), it also specifies procedures to be followed , for example, notice to a removed person and a judge’s review under s 24(9)-(11), and oath/affirmation requirements for non‑jurors allowed into jury deliberations (s 16(4)(c) and Schedule 1 parts 1.1A/1.1B). Enforcement mechanisms are a mix of criminal penalties, sheriff‑administered penalty notices, civil remedies (s 44AA(3) orders), and judicial review.

The Act establishes a graduated set of enforcement tools that combine summary monetary penalties, sheriff‑administered penalty notices, and criminal sanctions including imprisonment. The identity of prosecuting and enforcing authorities varies by provision and the Act places limits on prosecutorial initiation for some offences.

Monetary penalties and administrative enforcement

• Non‑attendance with no valid reason (s 41(1)) carries a maximum penalty of 10 penalty units. The Act notes the monetary value of a penalty unit elsewhere (Legislation Act) and the republication front matter states the values at the republication date.
• Leaving court premises without permission (s 42) and failing to comply with conditions imposed by the judge or sheriff (s 42A) each carry a maximum penalty of 10 penalty units.
• Section 42B establishes an administrative enforcement pathway: if a judge or sheriff is satisfied a contravention of ss 41, 42 or 42A has occurred, the sheriff may serve a notice offering the person a choice: pay an amount equivalent to 5 penalty units to a stated officer at a stated place and time, or show cause to the sheriff within a stated time why the penalty should not be imposed (s 42B(2)). The sheriff may require verification of statements by statutory declaration (s 42B(3)). If the penalty amount is paid, no further proceedings lie for the contravention (s 42B(6)). A person has a right to refuse to be dealt with under s 42B and is taken to have refused if they fail to show cause or pay within the time stated (s 42B(5)).
• Sheriff actions and police inquiries undertaken in good faith in relation to s 24(5) are shielded from personal liability (s 24(12)).

Criminal offences and maximum penalties

• Improper inquiry by a juror about matters relevant to trial (s 42BA) is a criminal offence with a maximum penalty of imprisonment for 2 years (s 42BA(1)). The section clarifies that inquiring in contravention of a judicial direction is not a proper exercise of a juror’s functions (s 42BA(3)). The Criminal Code ch 2 applies to this offence (see s 4 and note), making the general principles of criminal responsibility and burdens of proof applicable.
• Confidentiality offences under s 42C , disclosure, solicitation/obtaining for publication, and publication of protected information , carry maximum penalties of 50 penalty units, imprisonment for 6 months, or both (ss 42C(2)-(4)). The section defines “protected information” broadly and sets out specific statutory exceptions (ss 42C(5)-(9)).
• Personation of jurors (s 43) attracts a maximum penalty of 50 penalty units, imprisonment for 6 months, or both.
• Unlawful dismissal or injuring an employee because they are summoned for jury service (s 44AA(1)) carries a maximum penalty of 50 penalty units, imprisonment for 6 months, or both. Subsection (2) places the evidential onus on the employer to show the action was not because the employee was summoned when all other elements are proved.
• The Act also provides for corporate and representative liability principles (s 44AB). Acts or omissions by a representative within the scope of actual or apparent authority may be attributed to the person, but if the person establishes reasonable precautions and appropriate diligence were taken, the attribution defence may apply (s 44AB(5)). Subsection (6) prevents imprisonment in cases where conviction depends solely on attribution provisions.

Gatekeeping and prosecutorial discretion

• Notably, s 42C(10) prohibits bringing a prosecution under s 42C except with the written consent of the DPP or a person authorised by the DPP. This creates a gatekeeping requirement that concentrates charging decisions for confidentiality offences in the DPP’s office.

Procedural enforcement and review

• The sheriff’s administrative notice under s 42B provides a low‑cost, non‑court enforcement path for attendance and related offences, with an opportunity to show cause and to provide statutory declaration evidence (s 42B(2)-(3)). If the person refuses administrative treatment, normal court prosecution is available (s 42B(5)(a)).
• Judicial review pathways exist for persons who are removed from the jury roll under s 24(8) and notified under s 24(9): the person can object in writing to a judge, who must fix a date and time for hearing and decide whether the person should be reinstated (s 24(9)-(11)).
• For decisions under s 51A about payment of juror expenses, an aggrieved person may apply in writing to a judge for review (s 51A(3)).

Interaction with wider criminal law

• The Act explicitly incorporates the Criminal Code chapter 2 for the application of general criminal responsibility principles to s 42BA (see s 4 and the note under s 4). That means standards such as the allocation of proof and available defences under the Code will apply to the new juror‑inquiry offence.

Taken together, the enforcement scheme blends judge‑directed excusal and administrative remedies (s 14; s 42B) with a suite of criminal offences calibrated by maximum penalties, and centralises the decision to prosecute certain confidentiality offences with the DPP (s 42C(10)). The Act also provides attribution rules for corporate and representative liability while maintaining a carve‑out against imprisonment where conviction depends only on attribution (s 44AB(6)).

The Act is written to operate alongside and reference a number of other statutes and instruments; several cross‑references are explicit in the text and in the endnotes.

• Criminal Code. Section 4 states that other legislation applies to offences against the Act and the notes explicitly identify the Criminal Code, chapter 2 as applying to the offence in s 42BA (Improper inquiry by juror). The Criminal Code therefore supplies general principles of criminal responsibility , burdens of proof, definitions of conduct, intention and recklessness , for s 42BA prosecutions.

• Electoral Act and roll of electors. The dictionary defines the roll of electors of the ACT as the copy given to the sheriff under the Electoral Act 1992, s 65(3) (dictionary). The sheriff prepares the jury list from the roll of electors (s 19(1)) and removes names known to be dead or disqualified (s 19(2)). That integration ties jury eligibility to electoral registration mechanisms.

• Supreme Court Act 1933. For part 5 (jury precepts and summonses), the Act defines “sheriff” to include any person exercising functions of the sheriff in accordance with the Supreme Court Act 1933, s 52 (s 21). Operational duties of the sheriff in relation to jury precepts are therefore linked to that Act’s governance of the sheriff’s office.

• Court Procedures Act 2004 and approved forms. The Act’s notes reference approved form 1 (Jury precept) and approved form 2 (Jury summons) that are made under the Court Procedures Act 2004, s 8 (s 22 note; s 26 note). This identifies the prescribed practical forms and indicates a standards regime cross‑referenced to the Court Procedures Act.

• Legislation Act 2001 and disallowable instruments. The Minister’s determinations of meal allowances and juror payments are disallowable instruments (ss 49(3), 51(2)), and the Legislation Act 2001 governs the procedure for disallowance and the meaning of penalty units (Legislation Act s 133 and notes in the republication front matter). The Act therefore delegates monetary quantum decisions to the Executive but subjects them to Parliamentary oversight mechanisms.

• Statutory declarations and statutory evidence. Section 42B(3) authorises the sheriff to require verification by statutory declaration; the republished law notes that the Statutory Declarations Act 1959 (Cwlth) applies to the making of statutory declarations under ACT laws (s 42B(3) note). That binds the evidentiary form of declarations to Commonwealth legislation.

• Discrimination Act 1991. The dictionary cross‑references the Discrimination Act 1991, s 5AA(3) for the definition of “support person” (dictionary). The judge’s power to permit a support person under s 16 therefore links to a statutory definition in the discrimination law.

• Commonwealth, State and other Territory courts. Section 42C applies its confidentiality scheme to juries in criminal, civil or coronial proceedings "in a court of the Territory, the Commonwealth, a State or another Territory" (s 42C(1)). This creates an overlap in policy and enforceability across jurisdictions, and the Act therefore intersects with equivalent rules in other jurisdictions where they exist.

• Director of Public Prosecutions. Section 42C(10) requires written consent of the DPP (or authorised delegate) before allegation‑based prosecutions under s 42C can be instituted. This places a prosecutorial layer of decisionmaking that interacts with prosecutorial policy and practice under the DPP’s governing statutes and guidelines.

• Administrative law and judicial review. The Act builds in procedural review points (s 24(9)-(11), s 26A, s 51A(3)) that create judicial remediable decisions within the Supreme Court’s existing review jurisdiction. Those reviews will be governed by ordinary administrative and appellate law principles.

In short, the Act is implemented through a network of statutory interdependencies: electoral rolls determine the potential pool; the sheriff and Supreme Court statutes govern who executes jury processes; court procedure rules provide forms and practice; statutory declaration and criminal law regimes apply to enforcement and evidentiary mechanisms; and the DPP and Minister exercise delegated but significant powers that operate under other statutes (DPP governance and Legislation Act disallowance rules). Practitioners should check the referenced instruments and statutes for any operative details the Juries Act leaves to them.

The republished Act contains a full amendment history at the endnotes. The Act began as the Juries Ordinance 1967 (Commonwealth) and, following self‑government, was converted into an ACT enactment with the change from "Ordinance" to "Act" on 11 May 1989 (Legislation history). Key changes recorded in the amendment history are as follows , the list below cites the legislative instruments named in the endnotes and those amendments as they appear in the republished law.

• Conversion to Territory enactment and name change (1989). The Juries Ordinance 1967 was converted into an ACT enactment under the Australian Capital Territory (Self‑Government) Act 1988 and renamed by the Self‑Government (Citation of Laws) Act 1989 (Legislation history).

• Amendments through the 1990s and 2000s. The Act was amended multiple times: the Supreme Court (Amendment) Act (No 2) 1993, Juries (Amendment) Ordinances in the 1970s-1980s, and a sequence of Justice and Community Safety and Court Procedures amendment Acts between 1993 and the 2010s. Notable insertions include provisions on jury lists and juror oaths, removal of certain sections, and reorganisation of definitions into the dictionary (Amendment history shows numerous entries: A1993‑91, A1997‑83, A2001‑44, A2002‑40 and beyond).

• Creation of confidentiality and related offences (1997 and 2000s). Section 42C (confidentiality of jury deliberations and identities) was inserted by A1997‑83 (Amendment history). Subsequent amendments in the early 2000s (A2000‑1; A2000‑2) refined related provisions. The Amendment history records consolidation of Schedule changes and the insertion of s 42C.

• Expanded operational provisions and modernisation (2015-2018). Amendments in the 2010s (A2015‑52, A2018‑9, among others) added and altered sections concerning jury pools, identifying numbers (s 27A inserted A2015‑52 s 31, then amended A2018‑9 s 72), empanelling, inspection of jury pools, and introduced disallowable instruments for payments (s 49, s 51). A2018‑9 made a suite of reforms that included changes to juror oath provisions and procedural matters (Amendment history entries detail these changes).

• Most recent amendments (Crimes Legislation Amendment Act 2024 A2024‑12). The legislation history and amendment history show that A2024‑12 (Crimes Legislation Amendment Act 2024) made substantive changes that are reflected in the republished text. The endnotes record that parts of A2024‑12 commenced on 19 April 2024 and certain sections commenced on 19 October 2024 (Legislation history). Specific inserts/amendments credited to A2024‑12 in the Amendment history include insertion of s 37A (definitions for Part 8), amendments to s 38 and s 39 (disagreement/majority verdict rules), insertion of s 42BA (improper inquiry by juror) under s 16 of A2024‑12, and amendment of s 42C under s 17 of A2024‑12 (Amendment history shows s 42BA ins A2024‑12 s 16; s 37A ins A2024‑12 s 14; s 42C am A2024‑12 s 17; definition additions s 18).

• Ongoing editorial changes. The Parliamentary Counsel’s Office has authority to make editorial amendments under the Legislation Act 2001, part 11.3; endnotes indicate that some editorial changes may have been applied on republication. The republication front matter explains that editorial changes do not alter the substantive effect but have legal effect as if made by an Act commencing on republication date (see the republication notes).

The endnotes set out a detailed chronology of instruments with dates and commencement particulars. Practitioners needing a complete legislative timeline should consult the Legislation history and Amendment history in the republished Act for the exact instrument names and commencement dates as published. The republished law shows the cumulative effect of those amendments as at 19 October 2024.

The republished Juries Act 1967 does not include case annotations or a list of judicial decisions construing its provisions. The statutory text contains its own internal procedural review mechanisms and referral points that shape litigation patterns, namely:

• Review of removal from the jury roll. Where the sheriff removes a person’s name from the jury roll under s 24(8) (for example, due to prior conviction and an assessment that the person would be unable to adequately serve), the sheriff must notify the person in writing and the person may object by written application to a judge (s 24(9)-(11)). The Act thus anticipates judicial review of sheriff decisions concerning jury eligibility.

• Review of sheriff’s refusal to withdraw a summons. A person served with a jury summons who believes they are not qualified or are exempt or excused may apply in writing to a judge if the sheriff refuses to withdraw the summons (s 26A(2)-(4)). That procedure creates a discrete pathway for litigation or adjudication within the court.

• Review of sheriff decisions on juror expenses. Decisions by the sheriff on applications for payment of juror expenses under s 51A(2) may be reviewed by a judge upon written application (s 51A(3)), again creating a built‑in review mechanism short of external litigation.

• Trial of challenges for cause. Challenges for cause are tried by the judge presiding at the trial (s 36A). Decisions made during jury empanelling , on peremptory and cause challenges , will therefore be litigated or recorded within the criminal trial record.

• Prosecutorial gatekeeping for confidentiality offences. Section 42C(10) requires written consent of the Director of Public Prosecutions before a prosecution under s 42C may be instituted. That statutory limitation means prosecutorial decisions about confidentiality offences are concentrated in the DPP and potentially subject to DPP policy and internal review rather than routine police charging.

Because the Act itself is silent on case law, practitioners must rely on external reporting databases and court decisions to locate judicial interpretation. The Act’s internal review mechanisms (s 24(9)-(11); s 26A; s 51A(3)) will generate litigation records in the Supreme Court when exercised. The republished law provides the procedural hooks that will appear in litigation, but it does not supply case summaries or precedent guidance. For construction of newly inserted offences such as s 42BA, the Criminal Code’s principles (applied to that offence per s 4) will guide judicial analysis of elements like intention, recklessness and defences.

The text contains a number of specific traps for practitioners, administrators and participants that arise from the way operational duties and discretionary powers are drafted. Below are concrete items to watch, with the statutory mechanics identified.

• Being exempt or disqualified does not automatically excuse attendance after a summons is issued. Section 13 makes clear that a person on the jury list is not excused from attendance solely because they are not liable to serve, not qualified, or exempted, unless the sheriff is informed after the issue of the jury summons and has excused the person. Practically, someone who is disqualified but who is served with a summons may still be required to attend unless and until the sheriff acts on post‑issuance information (s 13).

• Timing for service of a jury summons is strict. A person must be personally served at least 4 clear days before the date to attend or served by post at least 7 clear days before the date to attend (s 26). Practitioners should count clear days, not business days, and ensure postal service requirements are met when advising clients or employees.

• Sheriff’s administrative pathway offers a limited alternative to court but with potential loss of contest. Under s 42B, the sheriff can propose a penalty payment equal to 5 penalty units to avoid a court referral. A person who pays the penalty avoids further proceedings, but payment is treated as acceptance of the administrative outcome; the person may decline the process and opt for court, but failure to respond or show cause results in being taken to have refused the administrative route (s 42B(5)-(6)). Practitioners must advise clients on whether to accept the administrative pathway or to contest in court.

• Support persons and interpreters can be admitted into jury deliberations in limited circumstances. Section 16(4)(a) states the common law rule against a non‑juror being present in the jury room is not a relevant consideration where the judge directs an interpreter or support person to assist a juror; however, the judge must be satisfied that the support is reasonable and does not impose disproportionate burdens or inhibit deliberations (s 16(2)-(3)). Where a non‑juror is permitted, they must swear an oath or affirmation (s 16(4)(c) and Schedule 1 parts 1.1A/1.1B). The presence of a non‑juror remains expressly limited to assisting that juror, which creates evidentiary and confidentiality issues if that person later becomes a source of disclosure or challenge.

• Confidentiality offences and research exceptions are narrowly framed. Section 42C criminalises disclosure, solicitation and publication of protected information with heavy penalties (up to 50 penalty units and 6 months’ imprisonment). There are statutory exceptions, including authorisation by the Attorney‑General for research into juries (s 42C(5)(e); s 42C(6)(d); s 42C(7)(a)), but those exceptions require specific authorisations. Additionally, charging for s 42C requires the DPP’s written consent (s 42C(10)), which concentrates prosecutorial discretion.

• Removal from the jury roll can be administrative and later litigated. Under s 24(8) the sheriff may remove a person from the jury roll if the person has a summary conviction and is judged unable to adequately exercise juror functions; the sheriff must notify the person and they can object to a judge (s 24(9)-(11)). Practitioners should ensure clients receive and act on such notices promptly to secure review rights.

• Expanded juries change peremptory challenge math. If the judge orders more than 12 jurors to be empanelled under s 31A, the Act adjusts the number of peremptory challenges available to the parties (s 31A(3)). For example, empanelling 13 or 14 jurors increases each party’s peremptory challenges to nine. Defence and prosecution must note these numeric changes in trial preparation.

• Empanelling substitutes can create identity and challenge issues. If all identifying numbers are called and fewer than 12 enter the box, the judge may order appointment of persons in or near court who are liable to serve (s 31(3)). Such appointees are treated as returned on the precept and allocated an identifying number (s 31(4)); they are also challengeable. The practical consequence is that persons not originally selected by sheriff randomisation can be placed on a jury by order of the judge.

• Informalities do not necessarily invalidate verdicts. Section 30 prevents an omission, informality or error in name, occupation or identifying number from invalidating a verdict so long as identity is not in question. This reduces grounds for challenge but also requires careful documentation where identity is genuinely contentious.

• Employer obligations and evidential onus. Under s 44AA, employers face a reverse evidential onus if an employee proves the action but not the motivation. If an employer is prosecuted and all elements other than motive are proved, the employer must prove the action was not because the employee was summoned (s 44AA(2)). Employers should document legitimate business reasons for dismissals or actions affecting employees summoned for jury service.

• Corporate attribution and punishment limitation. Section 44AB attributes acts of representatives to organisations for the purposes of the Act, but limits the imposition of imprisonment where the conviction depends solely on attribution provisions (s 44AB(6)). Corporates are therefore exposed to civil remedies and monetary penalties, but the Act restricts imprisonment outcomes to persons whose conviction is not solely attributable by s 44AB(3)-(4).

These concrete textual items produce operational risk points for compliance and litigation: late notification to the sheriff, the administrative penalty process, support‑person admission, confidentiality rules, and employer conduct are particular areas where care is required to avoid adverse legal or practical consequences.

Practical compliance requires attention to timelines, recordkeeping, decisionmaking thresholds and delegation pathways that the Act explicitly prescribes. The list below translates the Act’s provisions into actionable steps for the main actors.

For sheriffs and court