In sexual assault cases where the prosecution seeks to adduce relationship evidence while disavowing tendency use, the court must objectively examine whether the evidence is in truth relevant only through tendency reasoning. Evidence of prior non-consensual sexual acts by the accused against the complainant, tendered to show the complainant was unlikely to have consented on the charged occasion, involves tendency reasoning even if labelled as 'context' or 'relationship' evidence. Each item of disputed evidence must be individually assessed for relevance and under s 137, rather than treated globally as 'relationship evidence'.
The full text is available to signed-in members, including the 12 later cases that cite this judgment.
1 of the 12 citing cases carry a classified treatment. How each court treated it is available to signed-in members.