The mere unavailability of a defence witness, where that unavailability is not attributable to abuse of process by the Crown or prosecution authorities, does not of itself warrant a stay of criminal proceedings. While the Court left open the possibility that exceptional circumstances involving witness absence might justify a stay without proof of abuse of process, no such circumstances were found on the facts. The Crown is not obliged to call a witness it considers unreliable, even where that witness has previously given evidence exculpating the accused before a statutory inquiry.
The full text is available to signed-in members, including the 1 later case that cites this judgment.