The appellant sought to quash convictions for sexual interference arising from allegations that he repeatedly touched a child complainant under her clothing during family tickling incidents at a cottage.
The appeal argued that the trial reasons were insufficiently responsive to the defence theory of mistake, that the trial judge materially misapprehended the evidence, and that demeanour evidence was given undue weight.
Applying the functional sufficiency-of-reasons approach and reviewing the credibility analysis, the court held that the trial judge adequately addressed the live issues, made no material misapprehension, and did not over-rely on demeanour.
The appeal was dismissed and the surrender order was confirmed.
