TORONTO -- A massage therapist properly convicted of sexually assaulting two women will get a new trial because a judge failed to say why he refused to allow a separate hearing for each charge.

In overturning the conviction against Jitender Sahdev, Ontario's top court ruled the lack of reasons were enough to quash the conviction -- even though it found the judge who actually presided over the trial had made no errors.

"The appeal must be allowed and a new trial ordered because the application judge's failure to provide reasons for refusing severance frustrates meaningful appellate review," the Court of Appeal said in its decision on Thursday. "It is not apparent from the record why the application judge decided the issue in the manner that he did."

Court records show Sahdev, who ran a massage and yoga studio with his wife in London, Ont., applied to sever the charges related to incidents that occurred in June 2012.

According to his lawyer, Sahdev planned to testify in relation to one of the complainants, but probably not in relation to the other. The prosecution, which wanted a single trial on both counts, maintained the notion of his testifying at one trial was not realistic.

In February 2014, Superior Court Justice Andrew Goodman rejected the request to hold separate hearings, promising written reasons would follow. He never provided them -- even after the Appeal Court itself would later ask for them. It's unknown why.

Sahdev's trial on both counts proceeded almost two years later before Justice Duncan Grace. The defence did not raise the severance issue.

Evidence at trial was that two women separately went for massages to Sahdev's facility, Savy International. The first complainant, aged 25, said he touched her genitals inappropriately despite her requests for him to stop, and kissed her on the mouth. She went to police that same night.

Sahdev, a medical doctor by training, argued in his defence the woman had invited him to examine her breast and genital areas because she had problems with them, but said he had declined. Witnesses, one Sahdev's wife, said the woman had left the premises smiling and seemed fine.

The second woman, 27, went to him for a back, shoulder and neck massage, but complained a few days later -- after seeing a report on the first complaint -- that he had touched her breast and pubic areas. Sahdev said the woman was fully clothed during the massage, and denied touching her inappropriately.

Grace convicted him in December 2015, saying he didn't find the accused credible.

Sahdev raised several grounds on appeal, including the lack of reasons provided on the severance issue. He also argued Grace had subjected his evidence to a higher level of scrutiny than he did for the complainants.

While a judge has the discretion to require a single trial, the Appeal Court said, his decision must be transparent so it can be determined if it was legally sound. Without reasons, the higher court said it was left guessing why Goodman decided as he did, and the prosecution's suggestion that the higher court decide the severance issue retroactively would amount to trying to "reverse engineer" the initial decision.

The Appeal Court rejected Sahdev's other arguments but ruled only a new trial could fix the severance problem -- which it said was no minor or technical matter but a "critical procedural decision."

"I appreciate the repercussions of deciding the case on this basis," Appeal Court Justice Gary Trotter wrote for the panel. "The appellant's trial was a model of fairness. The trial judge made no errors in conducting the trial."