The accused, a black man, was charged with robbing an East Indian man.
At trial, the judge permitted the defence to challenge potential jurors for cause based on potential bias against a black accused, but refused to extend the challenge to include the race of the complainant.
The accused was convicted and appealed, arguing he was deprived of his right to an impartial jury.
The Court of Appeal set aside the conviction.
The Supreme Court of Canada allowed the Crown's appeal and restored the conviction, holding that the trial judge did not err in the exercise of his discretion.
The Court declined to take judicial notice of a general theory of race-based 'natural sympathy' between jurors and complainants of the same race.
