Robinson v The Queen

The High Court of Australia considered an appeal by Robinson against his convictions for sexual assault of a child under 12. The central issue before the Court was the necessity for a trial judge to provide a warning to the jury regarding the uncorroborated evidence of the complainant in such cases.

The Court was required to determine whether the absence of a specific warning to the jury about the dangers of relying solely on the uncorroborated evidence of a child complainant in a sexual assault trial constituted a miscarriage of justice. This involved considering the evidentiary weight and reliability of such testimony and the role of the trial judge in guiding the jury.

The High Court held that in cases involving allegations of sexual assault of a child under 12, where the complainant's evidence is uncorroborated, it is a matter of law that the trial judge must warn the jury of the potential dangers of acting on that evidence alone. The Court reasoned that while there is no absolute rule requiring corroboration, the inherent vulnerability of child complainants and the nature of the alleged offences necessitate a judicial warning to ensure the jury properly assesses the evidence and avoids potential prejudice. The failure to provide such a warning was considered a significant error.

Consequently, the High Court allowed the appeal, quashed the convictions and sentences, and ordered a new trial for the appellant.