The accused, an HIV and HSV positive individual, was charged with three counts of aggravated sexual assault for non-disclosure of HIV status to three complainants, one count of sexual assault causing bodily harm for allegedly transmitting HSV to one complainant, and two counts of failing to comply with a recognizance.
The Crown alleged the accused engaged in intimate relationships without disclosing his viral status.
The trial focused on whether non-disclosure vitiated consent and whether there was a realistic possibility of HIV transmission.
The court found that while the accused failed to disclose his HIV status, his undetectable viral load for more than six months negated any realistic possibility of transmission, distinguishing the case from the Supreme Court's decision in Mabior.
The court also found insufficient evidence to prove causation of the HSV infection.
All charges were dismissed.
