R v DH

In the matter of R v DH, the defendant stood accused of several counts of sexual assault. The victim, a young child, alleged that the defendant had engaged in multiple acts of sexual violence over a period of time. The case came before the court for appeal, with the defendant contesting the conviction on the basis that the trial judge had failed to adequately sum up the facts of the case. The trial judge had also allowed evidence of uncharged sexual assaults and evidence of the relationship between the defendant and the victim, and had failed to give a direction on the issue of delay in complaint and provide a corroboration warning.

The court was required to determine whether the trial judge's failure to sum up the facts of the case and provide a direction on delay in complaint was a miscarriage of justice. The court also had to consider whether the evidence of uncharged sexual assaults and relationship evidence was admissible and whether the failure to provide a corroboration warning was a miscarriage of justice. Finally, the court had to assess whether the verdict was unreasonable or unsupported by the evidence.

The court found that the trial judge's failure to sum up the facts of the case and provide a direction on delay in complaint was a miscarriage of justice. The court also found that the evidence of uncharged sexual assaults and relationship evidence was admissible, but that the failure to provide a corroboration warning was a miscarriage of justice. The court found that the verdict was unreasonable and unsupported by the evidence, and allowed the appeal. The conviction was quashed and a retrial ordered.