A recantation of trial evidence by a prosecution witness is a species of fresh evidence subject to a wider test than ordinary fresh evidence: the court must determine (i) whether the new version is sufficiently relevant, cogent and plausible to raise a doubt as to guilt, or (ii) whether the recanting witness's evidence is so untrustworthy it should not enter into the reasons for any verdict of guilty. Where the key prosecution witness has recanted, the practical consequence of allowing the appeal would be that no retrial could be ordered, as the prosecution could not properly call the witness as hostile merely to get the earlier evidence before the court.
The full text is available to signed-in members, including the 4 later cases that cite this judgment.
3 of the 4 citing cases carry a classified treatment. How each court treated it is available to signed-in members.