The Jones v Dunkel principle of adverse inference from failure to adduce evidence is only engaged in stay applications where the applicant's material raises a question requiring an answer; the mere fact that the respondent could have adduced financial evidence does not justify an adverse inference. However, counsel for a respondent who declines to adduce financial evidence must consider whether silence is consistent with the duty not to mislead the court, particularly where there are known circumstances creating a risk of non-repayment.
The full text is available to signed-in members, including the 8 later cases that cite this judgment.
2 of the 8 citing cases carry a classified treatment. How each court treated it is available to signed-in members.