OL v The Queen

The High Court of Australia heard an appeal in the matter of *OL v The Queen*. The appellant, OL, was convicted of a sexual offence. The central dispute on appeal concerned the admissibility of certain evidence and the fairness of the trial process.

The High Court was required to determine whether the trial judge erred in admitting evidence of the appellant's prior sexual conduct with the complainant, and whether the trial judge's directions to the jury regarding this evidence were adequate. Further, the Court considered whether the cumulative effect of certain directions and the admission of the evidence rendered the trial unfair.

The Court reasoned that the admission of evidence of prior sexual conduct, pursuant to s 137 of the *Evidence Act 1995* (NSW), required a balancing of probative value against prejudicial effect. While such evidence might have some probative value in establishing a pattern of behaviour or consent, its prejudicial effect could be substantial. The Court found that the trial judge had failed to adequately consider the prejudicial impact of the evidence and had not provided sufficiently clear directions to the jury on how they should use it, thereby creating a real risk of unfairness.

Consequently, the High Court allowed the appeal, quashed the conviction, and ordered a new trial.