R v Gene David Scorringe

The case of R v Gene David Scorringe involved a criminal prosecution for non-consensual sexual intercourse. The defendant applied to adduce evidence that may imply previous sexual activity between him and the complainant, in an effort to demonstrate that the complainant's allegations were fabricated. The application was heard in the Supreme Court of New South Wales. The central legal issue before the court was the interpretation of the term "so alleged" in section 293(4)(c) of the Criminal Procedure Act 1986, and whether the proposed evidence was relevant to the defence's case.

The court considered the purpose of section 293(4)(c) of the Act, which is to protect complainants from having their sexual history exposed unless it is directly relevant to the case. In this instance, the court determined that the proposed evidence did not meet the criteria for admissibility, as it was not directly relevant to the defence's case and was more likely to cause unnecessary prejudice and confusion. The court emphasised that the law aims to protect complainants from having their sexual history exposed unless it is directly relevant to the case. The evidence that was proposed to be led was deemed inadmissible.

No further orders were made by the court. The evidence that was proposed to be led is inadmissible, and the trial will proceed without this evidence being presented.