The case confirms that the test for miscarriage of justice arising from counsel's conduct is objective: whether there is an objectively rational forensic basis for the approach taken. Defence counsel's decision not to call a witness will not give rise to a miscarriage of justice where there are reasonable forensic risks in doing so, including the risk of inconsistency with the accused's evidence and the risk of the witness's credibility being attacked. New evidence that was available at trial will not establish a miscarriage of justice unless it establishes the accused should not have been convicted.
The full text is available to signed-in members, including the 2 later cases that cite this judgment.