A trial judge must warn self-represented litigants of the potential application of Jones v Dunkel inferential reasoning before they elect not to give evidence, particularly where the litigant's defence depends on matters within their personal knowledge. The duty to explain evidentiary consequences to self-represented parties extends beyond the general distinction between submissions and evidence to include specific warnings about adverse inferences that may be drawn from a failure to give evidence. Where an affidavit is admitted by consent for a limited purpose, it cannot be relied upon for other purposes without a further ruling on admissibility.
The full text is available to signed-in members, including the 46 later cases that cite this judgment.
3 of the 46 citing cases carry a classified treatment. How each court treated it is available to signed-in members.