R v Shrestha

The High Court of Australia heard an appeal from a decision of the Supreme Court of Queensland in the matter of *R v Shrestha*. The case concerned the interpretation and application of provisions within the *Criminal Code* (Qld) relating to the offence of unlawful sexual assault.

The central legal issue before the High Court was whether the trial judge had erred in directing the jury on the elements of the offence of unlawful sexual assault, specifically concerning the requirement of consent and the appropriate direction on the issue of belief in consent. The court was also required to consider whether the jury's verdict was unsafe or unsatisfactory in light of the evidence presented at trial.

The High Court analysed the relevant sections of the *Criminal Code* (Qld) and existing common law principles regarding sexual offences. Their Honours emphasised that the prosecution bears the onus of proving, beyond reasonable doubt, that the sexual act was unlawful and that the complainant did not consent. The court clarified that a belief in consent, to be a defence, must be honestly held and, in certain circumstances, may require the accused to have taken reasonable steps to ascertain consent. The judges considered the evidence in light of these principles and the directions given at trial.

The High Court found that the jury's verdict was unsafe and unsatisfactory due to misdirection on the law relating to consent and belief in consent. Consequently, the appeal was allowed, the conviction was quashed, and a new trial was ordered.