Andre Aaron Gerrard v. Her Majesty the Queen
(Nova Scotia) (Criminal) (As of Right)
Criminal law - Evidence - Criminal law — Evidence — Credibility — Whether the trial judge erred in her application of the test in R. v. W.(D.),  1 S.C.R. 742 — Whether the trial judge erred in assessing the credibility of the Crown witness, the complainant.
Case summaries are prepared by the Office of the Registrar of the Supreme Court of Canada (Law Branch). Please note that summaries are not provided to the Judges of the Court. They are placed on the Court file and website for information purposes only.
The appellant was convicted after trial before a judge alone of thirteen counts relating to various offences committed against his common law spouse. Applying the principles set out in R. v. W.(D.),  1 S.C.R. 742, the trial judge concluded that the complainant had not been motivated to lie, and that the evidence did not give rise to such an inference. The trial judge accepted the complainant’s evidence and found that it did not raise a reasonable doubt, and she rejected the appellant’s evidence and concluded that it also did not raise a reasonable doubt.
A majority of the Nova Scotia Court of Appeal dismissed the appellant’s appeal and upheld the convictions. In the majority’s view, the trial judge did not misapply W.(D.) and she did not err in assessing the complainant’s credibility. In dissent, Bryson J.A. would have allowed the appeal and ordered a new trial.
- Date modified: