The failure to give a Longman direction in a delayed complaint sexual offence case constitutes a fundamental error in the conduct of the trial, warranting leave to appeal under Rule 4 even where defence counsel did not request the direction. A direction to scrutinise evidence with care, without explaining why it is dangerous to convict (namely the forensic disadvantages caused by delay), is insufficient. Corroborative evidence that is itself subject to the same delay does not remove the need for the direction. Both Crown and defence counsel have a positive obligation to draw the trial judge's attention to the need for a Longman direction.
The full text is available to signed-in members, including the 33 later cases that cite this judgment.
4 of the 33 citing cases carry a classified treatment. How each court treated it is available to signed-in members.