Incandela v The Queen

The appeal concerned a criminal conviction where the appellant, Incandela, was found guilty by a jury. The dispute revolved around the appellant's assertion that the jury's verdict was unreasonable, alleging a miscarriage of justice. The appeal was heard by Loukas-Karlsson, Baker, and Charlesworth JJ in the Court of Appeal.

The Court of Appeal was required to determine several legal issues. These included whether the verdict was unreasonable given the credibility of witnesses and the lack of corroborating evidence, whether photographs of bruising caused unfair prejudice, whether the evidence of bruising, not obtained by police, was admissible, whether directions regarding the definition of consent were misleading, whether an alternative case should have been left to the jury, and whether there was a failure to capture key points in the summing up.

The Court dismissed the appeal, finding no basis for the appellant's arguments. It was held that the jury was entitled to accept the complainant's evidence and reject the appellant's version of events, even in the absence of corroboration. The photographs of bruising were deemed admissible and not unfairly prejudicial, as they were relevant to the complainant's account. The directions on consent were found to be adequate, and the decision not to leave an alternative case to the jury was justified. Furthermore, the summing up was considered to have adequately captured the key issues.