Summary

Keywords

Criminal law — Sexual assault — Sexual history evidence — Credibility — Curative Proviso —How should prejudice to the accused be assessed when the Crown leads inadmissible sexual history evidence? — How does the curative proviso in s. 686(1)(b)(iii) of the Criminal Code, R.S.C. 1985, c. C-46, apply in credibility cases?

Summary

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.

(PUBLICATION BAN IN CASE)

At trial before judge alone in the Provincial Court of British Columbia, the applicant, George Mathew, was convicted of a single count of sexual assault.

The applicant appealed his conviction on the grounds that the trial judge erred by (1) admitting evidence of prior sexual conduct without holding a voir dire; and (2) reversing the burden of proof by finding that his failure to adduce corroborative evidence adversely affected his reliability. The Court of Appeal unanimously dismissed the appeal. It applied the curative proviso in s. 686(1)(b)(iii) of the Criminal Code to any errors in relation to the two grounds of appeal.

Lower Court Rulings