R v Rubick CA35/04

In the case of R v Rubick, the defendant appealed his conviction for sexual violation by way of unlawful sexual connection. The appeal raised issues regarding the conduct of trial counsel and the conduct of the trial itself, including the summing up. The Court of Appeal considered five grounds of appeal, which were categorised into two general headings. The first ground related to the conduct of trial counsel, including allegations of failure to follow instructions, failure to investigate important matters, and failure to adequately present the defence case. The second ground related to the conduct of the trial, including the summing up. The Court found that while there were some issues with the conduct of counsel, they did not amount to a miscarriage of justice. However, the Court was concerned about the Judge's comments in the summing up, which could have been perceived as an expression of the Judge's view on the credibility of the defendant. The Court concluded that there was a real possibility of a miscarriage of justice and therefore quashed the conviction and ordered a new trial.