Charges: Assault causing harm x 1.
Appeal type: Appeal against conviction.
Facts: The complainant gave evidence that the appellant punched her from behind, pushed her to the floor, pushed her head into the floor and wall, and bit her on the cheek (-).
Issues: Whether the conviction was unreasonable or insupportable having regard to the evidence.
Decision and Reasoning: The appeal was allowed, and the matter was remitted for retrial before a different magistrate ().
Lovell J described the case as an ‘oath on oath’ case (). At -, Lovell J provides a useful exposition of what is necessary for a Magistrate to include in a judgement to amount to adequate reasons. Simply summarising the evidence is not sufficient. The reasons must engage with conflicts in evidence and how those conflicts can be resolved.
Lovell J held that the Magistrate failed to provide adequate reasons in two areas. First, in accepting the evidence of a police officer and M’s treating doctor without explaining how the Magistrate reconciled the inconsistencies between their evidence and M’s evidence (-). Second, in dismissing the evidence of the appellant’s uncle without explaining why (-).