Gustav (a pseudonym) v The King

Gustav (a pseudonym) was appealing against his conviction and sentence for sexual offences involving children under 16 years of age. The appeal was heard by the High Court of Australia, which had jurisdiction to hear the appeal under the Australian Constitution. The main issues in the appeal were whether certain tendency evidence admitted at trial was admissible and whether the refusal to sever the matters amounted to unfair prejudice. The court had to consider the principles set out in the Evidence Act 2008 and the relevant High Court cases, including Hughes v The Queen and R v Bauer.

The court held that in cases involving multiple complainants, there must be a common feature to the offending that imbues significant probative value to the tendency evidence. The court found that the evidence in this case demonstrated a common feature that Gustav had a sexual interest in children under 16 years of age and a tendency to act upon it by committing sexual offences against them opportunistically in circumstances which entailed a high risk of detection. The court held that such was the significance of that common feature that evidence of each alleged sexual offence and uncharged act had significant probative value in proof of each other charged offence. The court also found that the refusal to sever the matters did not amount to unfair prejudice to the appellant.

The appeal was dismissed, and the conviction and sentence were upheld. The court found that the trial judge had correctly admitted the tendency evidence and that the refusal to sever the matters did not amount to unfair prejudice. The appellant's conviction and sentence were therefore affirmed. The court did not make any further orders.