Sexual Offences (Evidence and Procedure) Act 1983

In an examination of witnesses or a trial, whether or not it relates also to a charge of an offence other than a sexual offence against the same or another defendant, except with the leave of the court, evidence shall not be elicited or led, whether by examination in chief, cross-examination or re-examination, relating to:

the complainant's general reputation as to chastity; or

the complainant's sexual activities with any other person,

and the leave of the court shall not be granted unless the court is satisfied that the evidence sought to be elicited or led has substantial relevance to the facts in issue.

For the purposes of subsection (1)(b), evidence that relates to or tends to establish the fact that the complainant was accustomed to engage in sexual activities with any other person, shall not be regarded:

as having substantial relevance to the facts in issue by reason only of an inference it may raise as to general disposition; or

as being proper matter for cross-examination as to credit, in the absence of special circumstances by reason of which it would be likely materially to impair the confidence in the reliability of the evidence of the complainant.

For the purposes of subsection (1)(b), and without derogating from the relevance of other evidence in an examination of witnesses or a trial, evidence of an act or event that is substantially contemporaneous with an offence with which a defendant is charged, or that is part of a sequence of acts or events that explain the circumstances in which the alleged offence was committed, shall be regarded as having substantial relevance to the facts in issue.

An application for leave of the court for the purposes of subsection (1)(b) shall be made in the absence of the jury, if any, and, if the defendant so requests, in the absence of the complainant, and shall be determined after the court has allowed such submissions or evidence, given on oath or otherwise, as it considers necessary for the determination of the application.

On the trial of a person for a sexual offence or an assault with intent to commit such an offence:

the Supreme Court Judge shall not warn, or suggest in any way to, the jury that it is unsafe to convict on the uncorroborated evidence of a complainant because the law regards complainants as an unreliable class of witness; and

where:

evidence is given; or

a question is asked of a witness; or

a statement is made in the course of an address on evidence,

which tends to suggest that there was delay in making a complaint about the alleged sexual offence, or alleged assault with intent to commit such an offence, by the person against whom the offence is alleged to have been committed, the Supreme Court Judge shall:

warn the jury that delay in complaining does not necessarily indicate that the allegation is false; and

inform the jury that there may be good reasons why a victim of a sexual offence may hesitate in complaining about it.

Nothing in subsection (5) prevents a judge from making any comment on evidence given in a trial that it is appropriate to make in the interests of justice.