Bolton v The State of Western Australia

The appeal heard by the court involved the appellant, who had been convicted of sexual offences. The appellant argued that statements made by the complainant to him over the internet were relevant to his defence, specifically concerning consent or an honest and reasonable belief in consent. The trial judge had excluded this evidence under section 36BC of the Evidence Act 1906 (WA). The central legal issue was whether these out-of-court statements related to the complainant's sexual experiences or her sexual disposition, as per section 36BA of the Evidence Act. The appellant contended that the statements were pertinent to his defence and should not have been excluded.

The court examined the nature and purpose of the excluded evidence in relation to the statutory provisions. It was determined that the statements did pertain to the complainant's sexual experiences and could be considered relevant to the appellant's defence concerning his belief about consent. The court found that the trial judge had erred in excluding this evidence, as it was relevant and should have been admitted under the appropriate statutory exceptions. This error was deemed significant enough to warrant a retrial of the case.

Consequently, the court allowed the appeal, setting aside the appellant's conviction and ordering a retrial. The court's decision highlighted the importance of correctly applying the statutory exceptions to the hearsay rule, ensuring that relevant evidence is not unjustly excluded. The final order was for the appeal to be allowed and for the conviction to be quashed, with directions for a retrial to be conducted.