The appellant appealed his conviction for sexual assault.
The conviction rested entirely on the evidence of the complainant, who had admitted to fabricating a detailed story to the police about a doctor's visit and pregnancy test.
The Court of Appeal found that the complainant's evidence lacked credibility and that the trial judge's instructions to the jury failed to adequately highlight the significance of her fabricated evidence.
The Court concluded that a properly instructed jury, acting judicially, could not have rendered a guilty verdict based exclusively on this evidence.
The appeal was allowed, the conviction quashed, and an acquittal entered.
