The accused was charged with one count of assault and one count of assault with a weapon (a water bottle) involving his wife.
The Crown proceeded summarily and the accused pleaded not guilty.
The case turned on the credibility and reliability of the complainant and the accused.
The court found the complainant's evidence regarding the first assault compelling and corroborated by her injuries, resulting in a guilty verdict on the assault charge.
However, regarding the alleged assault with a water bottle on the following day, the court found insufficient evidence to prove guilt beyond a reasonable doubt, as the complainant expressed uncertainty about whether the accused deliberately threw the bottle at her, and the accused's version that he threw it onto the table raised a reasonable doubt.
The court also addressed the application of the rule in Browne v. Dunn regarding cross-examination and found that while there was a failure to cross-examine on certain matters relating to the first incident, this was not determinative.
