Counts framed on a 'first occasion' basis are not necessarily unsafe where the complainant gives detailed and specific evidence of the acts constituting the count, the timeframes are relatively narrow, and the particulars are enhanced by reference to different premises, even where the complainant acknowledges the incidents were 'all the same'. R v DWB and R v Osborne are confined to cases where complainants were unable to differentiate between offending over lengthy periods and could not give evidence as to what occurred on the relevant first occasion.
The full text is available to signed-in members, including the 4 later cases that cite this judgment.