Following HML v The Queen, a jury must be directed that before acting on evidence of uncharged sexual acts between the accused and the complainant, they must be satisfied beyond reasonable doubt that those acts occurred. Evidence on peripheral and uncontentious matters (such as house layouts and school dates) cannot constitute corroboration of the complainant's evidence as to the commission of charged offences. Where the prosecution relies on proof of prior offences as steps in its case, the accused's denial of those offences cannot be treated as lies capable of corroborating the complainant under the Edwards lies direction.
The full text is available to signed-in members, including the 4 later cases that cite this judgment.
1 of the 4 citing cases carry a classified treatment. How each court treated it is available to signed-in members.