Court will consider burden of proof for ‘reasonably mistaken’ defence in sexual act with person under 17

State appealing a High Court decision that deemed a section of Sexual Offences Act as unconstitutional

The court was told its ruling in the appeal will affect a number of pending prosecutions.

The Supreme Court will consider the legal burden of proof placed on a defendant seeking to establish they were reasonably mistaken about the age of a child with whom they are accused of engaging in a sexual act.

The State is appealing a High Court decision that deemed a section of the 2006 Criminal Law (Sexual Offences) Act unconstitutional as it imposed more than an evidential burden of proof on an accused who wished to invoke a defence that they were reasonably mistaken in thinking the minor had attained the age of 17 years.