The application of the Browne v Dunn rule in criminal trials depends on the circumstances of the case and has as its principal purpose securing fairness; the trial judge is in a better position than the appellate court to assess whether such a direction is warranted having regard to the context and atmosphere of the trial. An acquittal on some counts does not necessarily mean the jury rejected the complainant's veracity — it may mean only that the jury was not satisfied beyond reasonable doubt on those counts while accepting the complainant's evidence on others. In determining whether a prosecution is an abuse of process on the ground of ulterior purpose, it is the motive of the prosecuting authority that is relevant, not the motive of the complainant.
The full text is available to signed-in members, including the 1 later case that cites this judgment.