23 Feb 2023
Leave to appeal was refused because the issues were case-specific, Christian v R already governed the required approach to consent directions where the defence denies offending, and the Court of Appeal's conclusions that any omission did not produce a miscarriage of justice were not shown to be wrong; therefore no threshold for leave under s 74 was met.
2 Jul 2019
No reluctant/regretted consent direction was required on these facts given the judge's consent direction and the evidence; the lies direction for the complainant was inadvisable but did not cause a miscarriage; inconsistent verdicts were explicable on the evidence and therefore convictions were safe; preventive detention was justified because the offender posed a high, entrenched risk of serious violent sexual reoffending and had failed prior treatment, making a determinate sentence plus ESO insufficient to protect the community.