The defendant sought to adduce evidence of school rumours from March 2017 in which the complainant allegedly made false allegations of sexual assault against her cousin.
The defendant sought to cross-examine the complainant about her involvement in these rumours to suggest she has a propensity to fabricate sexual allegations.
The Crown opposed the application, arguing that any questions about the rumours would constitute other sexual activity evidence under section 276 of the Criminal Code and would require compliance with the statutory regime.
The court found that questions about the rumours and the complainant's involvement were inextricably linked to communications of a sexual nature and therefore triggered section 276 protections.
The court dismissed the application, finding that the evidence lacked significant probative value and was substantially outweighed by prejudicial effect.