The appellant appealed his summary conviction for sexual assault.
At trial, the appellant briefly denied the allegations in chief, which the trial judge found lacked detail and therefore gave little weight to his evidence under the W.(D.) framework.
The Superior Court of Justice allowed the appeal, holding that a denial of events will necessarily lack detail, and the trial judge erred in law by rejecting the evidence on this basis before properly applying the first two steps of W.(D.).
A new trial was ordered.
