Case information

None.

Case summaries are prepared by the Office of the Registrar of the Supreme Court of Canada (Law Branch). Please note that summaries are not provided to the Judges of the Court. They are placed on the Court file and website for information purposes only.

Criminal law - Trial - Jury instructions - Credibility - Whether the majority of the Court of Appeal erred in law in quashing a conviction on the basis that the trial judge had not correctly instructed the jury on the issue of credibility in accordance with the judgment of this Court in R. v. W.(D.), [1991] 1 S.C.R. 742.

The complainant testified that the Respondent sexually assaulted her over a number of years, until her early teens. Her mother lived with the Respondent, as did the complainant and her sister. The Respondent denied any sexual activity with the complainant.

The Respondent was tried before a judge and jury for sexual assault contrary to s. 271(1)(a) of the Criminal Code. Credibility was an issue at trial. The trial judge instructed the jury on the presumption of innocence and then charged the jury on reasonable doubt. The jury found him guilty. On appeal, the majority of the Court of Appeal allowed the appeal because the trial judge had failed to properly instruct the jury on the application of reasonable doubt to the issue of credibility and ordered a new trial. Saunders J.A., dissenting, found that the jury was given clear instructions and would have dismissed the appeal.