Iacobucci J.
Iacobucci J. — This is an appeal as of right that comes to the Court as a result of the dissenting judgment of Feldman J.A. in the Ontario Court of Appeal on the issue of necessity regarding the admissibility of hearsay evidence of the complainant in a sexual assault case. Feldman J.A. reasoned that the trial judge erred in law because, although the complainant was unavailable to attend on the trial date, she may have been available in a few weeks and so an adjournment was in order to safeguard the rights of the accused.
Neither party requested an adjournment. Viewed narrowly, the trial judge was required to determine, on the issue of necessity, whether the complainant was available to testify on the date all parties agreed to proceed. The evidence was clear and uncontradicted that for medical reasons she could not testify on that date.
Viewed more broadly, although we share the concerns identified by Feldman J.A. on the matter, particularly in cases of this kind, we are of the view that when one considers all the circumstances and evidence before the trial judge, there is no reason to interfere with his discretionary decision to find necessity and admit the statements.
In particular, there was evidence before the trial judge on which he could conclude that there was no reasonable possibility that the complainant would be available to testify within an acceptable period of time. Accordingly, the appeal is dismissed.