The appellant was convicted at trial of sexual assault and sexual interference.
He appealed on the basis that the trial judge failed to give adequate reasons with respect to the assessment of witness credibility.
The majority of the Court of Appeal held that the trial judge's reasons were sufficiently articulate in explaining how credibility issues were resolved, that the trial judge applied the proper framework to assess credibility, and that the trial judge did not misapprehend evidence.
The Supreme Court unanimously dismissed the appeal, adopting the reasons of the dissenting Court of Appeal judge.
