R v Ernst

In the case of R v Ernst, the appellant appealed against his conviction on 11 of 15 counts of sexual offences against the same complainant. The appeal was heard in the Court of Appeal, which was tasked with determining whether the appellant's conviction should be upheld or if a miscarriage of justice had occurred. The Crown's case relied entirely on the complainant's evidence, while the defence maintained that none of the alleged acts occurred. Although there was no corroboration of the complainant's evidence, it was supported to some extent by preliminary complaint evidence. The complainant was under 16 years old for counts 1, 2, and 3, and the appellant was 16 years of age or older for counts 4 through 15. The complainant admitted to having a consensual sexual relationship with the appellant when she was 17 and also admitted to making false allegations of a sexual nature in the past.

The Court of Appeal was required to decide whether the prosecution had failed to disclose information that was crucial to the defence's case, specifically, the evidence of a friend of the complainant who deposed that the complainant had told her about her "affair" with the appellant and that the complainant spoke of the relationship and the appellant in positive terms. The friend also gave evidence about the complainant's propensity to lie. The friend had contacted prosecution authorities before the appellant's trial to provide this information but was not believed by the police officer she spoke to. Consequently, none of this information was disclosed to the defence, breaching the prosecution's duty of disclosure. The appellant argued that this breach had resulted in a miscarriage of justice.

The Court of Appeal found that the prosecution had indeed failed to disclose information that was crucial to the defence's case. The court held that the failure to disclose this information had occasioned a miscarriage of justice, as it significantly undermined the credibility of the complainant's evidence and went to the question of consent. As a result, the appeal was allowed, the verdicts of guilty were set aside, and a re-trial of the counts on which the appellant was found guilty was ordered.