A trial judge directing a jury on Jones v Dunkel must not offer explanations for the absence of witnesses that were not advanced by the party who failed to call them, and must not imply that absent witnesses would add nothing to the evidence where the evidence already called is under challenge on matters within those witnesses' knowledge. The cumulative evidence exception to Jones v Dunkel does not provide a shield against justifiable criticism that a party has deliberately kept less favourable witnesses from testifying. When expert evidence is admitted, the jury must be directed that the weight of the evidence depends on whether they accept the assumptions on which it was based.
The full text is available to signed-in members, including the 33 later cases that cite this judgment.
2 of the 33 citing cases carry a classified treatment. How each court treated it is available to signed-in members.