The appellant appealed his conviction for sexual assault, arguing that the trial judge violated his equality rights under section 15 of the Charter by requiring him, as a gay man, to ascertain the complainant's sexual orientation to avail himself of the defence of honest but mistaken belief in consent.
The Court of Appeal dismissed the appeal, finding that the trial judge did not impose a special obligation based on sexual orientation.
Instead, the trial judge correctly applied the standard law, concluding the appellant was wilfully blind or reckless in assuming consent without inquiry.
