R v DBG

The appeal heard by the High Court involved the respondent, DBG, appealing against convictions for various sexual offences. The trial judge had directed the jury to consider the delay in making complaints about the offences. The Court of Appeal upheld the convictions, and DBG sought special leave to appeal to the High Court, which was granted. The central issue before the High Court was whether the trial judge's warnings and directions to the jury adequately addressed the consideration of the delay in complaint, and if not, whether this inadequacy rendered the verdicts unsafe and unreliable. Additionally, the court considered whether the delay in complaint could be relevant to the jury's consideration of the reliability of the victim's evidence.

The High Court held that the trial judge's warnings and directions to the jury were inadequate, as they did not sufficiently address the legal principles governing the consideration of the delay in complaint. The court emphasised that such delays could be relevant to the reliability of the victim's evidence, but only if the jury was properly directed on the legal principles applicable. The High Court found that the inadequacy of the warnings and directions meant that the jury's consideration of the delay in complaint was likely to have affected the verdicts, rendering them unsafe and unreliable. Consequently, the convictions were quashed, and the matter was remitted to the Court of Appeal for further consideration.

The High Court did not make any further orders beyond quashing the convictions and remitting the matter to the Court of Appeal. The Court of Appeal will need to consider the adequacy of the trial judge's warnings and directions in light of the High Court's reasoning, and may need to conduct a fresh assessment of the safety and reliability of the verdicts. The High Court's decision highlights the importance of proper judicial direction when dealing with issues of delayed complaints in sexual offence cases, and underscores the need for clear and comprehensive warnings to ensure the safety and reliability of jury verdicts.