27 Jun 1996
The Crown's cross-examination question, based on unused material and containing factual errors, was highly damaging and prejudicial such that the applicant did not receive a fair trial; accordingly the conviction was quashed, sentence set aside and a retrial ordered.
25 Jun 1984
Because the court prosecutor was permitted to ask inadmissible questions about a co-defendant's guilty plea which would have bewildered and prejudiced the unrepresented appellant, and the magistrate did not expressly state that he ignored that inadmissible matter, the conviction was unsafe and was quashed.
28 Sept 1979
The improper cross-examination during the voir dire was a substantial irregularity that could have influenced the trial judge's assessment of voluntariness; because it is impossible to say the judge would have admitted the confession absent that irregularity and the confession could have seriously influenced the jury, the court could not apply the proviso and must allow the appeal and order a retrial.
21 Oct 1974
The convictions were unsafe and could not stand because the prosecution improperly examined its own witnesses and treated a witness as hostile to deploy prior statements without proper procedure, the examination was unduly aggressive (amounting to bullying), and the judge's summing-up contained misdirection on a material issue (alleged complaint to the complainant's brother), together rendering the jury's verdict unsafe.