The young person appealed a conviction for an offence involving the issue of consent.
The Court of Appeal allowed the appeal, finding that the trial judge failed to resolve significant inconsistencies in the evidence regarding how the complainant met the appellant.
Furthermore, the trial judge erred by merely stating a preference for the complainant's evidence without properly applying the burden of proof beyond a reasonable doubt as required by W.(D.).
The conviction was set aside and a new trial ordered.
