C, GM v Police (No 2)

The applicant, GMC, appealed against a decision of a single Judge of the Supreme Court of South Australia, who had allowed an appeal against GMC's conviction on one count of indecent assault, but upheld his conviction on another count. The applicant sought permission to appeal to the Full Court, arguing that the Judge had erred in not setting aside the conviction on both counts. The appeal involved complex issues concerning the reliability of the evidence given by the victim, who was a child at the time of the alleged offences and was now an adult, and the difficulties in confronting the allegations after a long delay. The key legal issue was whether the Judge had erred in failing to set aside the conviction on both counts, considering the acquittal on one count, weaknesses in the evidence, the long delay between the events and the trial, and certain suggested errors by the Judge.

The Full Court of the Supreme Court of South Australia considered whether the criteria for granting leave to appeal were satisfied. The Court noted that there was no indication of error on the part of the Judge in his assessment of the evidence and his application of the law. The case did not raise an issue of principle or general importance. The Full Court held that the criteria for granting leave to appeal were not satisfied, as the appeal did not involve any significant legal question or issue of general importance. Consequently, the applicant's application for leave to appeal was refused.

The Court did not find any error in the Judge's decision and confirmed the conviction on one count of indecent assault, while setting aside the conviction on the other count. The Full Court's decision was final, and no further appeal was permitted. The applicant was left with the conviction on one count of indecent assault, while the acquittal on the other count stood.