SV v The Queen

The appellant, SV, appealed to the court against a jury verdict of guilty for sexual intercourse without consent and an act of indecency. Initially, the appellant was unrepresented and sought to appeal only against the severity of his sentence. However, he later applied to amend his notice of appeal to include an appeal against his conviction.

The primary legal issues before the court were whether leave should be granted to amend the notice of appeal to include an appeal against conviction, and if so, whether there were grounds to allow such an appeal. This involved considering the appellant's assertion of a discrepancy between forensic evidence and the complainant's evidence, and the failure to call a three-year-old child as a witness. The court also had to determine if these matters, or any other aspect of the trial, posed a risk of miscarriage of justice.

The court reasoned that the appellant's argument regarding the discrepancy between forensic evidence and the complainant's evidence conflated the difference between evidence of absence and the absence of evidence. Furthermore, the court distinguished between the competence and credibility of a witness, noting that competence is generally not tested before a jury. Given these considerations, the court found no risk of a miscarriage of justice that would warrant allowing an appeal against conviction. Consequently, the court refused the appellant's application to amend his notice of appeal. The court then indicated that the parties would be heard on the necessary orders to proceed with the appeal against sentence without further delay.