Previous Topic

Next Topic

Book Contents

Book Index

4.12.2 - Charge: Warning Against Improper Browne v Dunn Reasoning

Click here to obtain a Word version of this document for adaptation

When to Use This Charge

This charge may be used where the prosecution has improperly suggested that the rule in Browne v Dunn has been breached.

See Directions Under Jury Directions Act 2015 for information on when directions are required.

Alternative Charges

Where the rule in Browne v Dunn has been breached, use Charge: Breach of the Rule in Browne v Dunn instead.

In this case the prosecution [describe relevant action, e.g., "cross-examined NOA about why defence counsel failed to ask NOW about…" or"suggested that defence counsel should have asked NOW about…"]

This was not an appropriate argument for the prosecution to make, as defence counsel was not obliged to ask NOW about this matter.

You must therefore disregard the prosecution’s arguments on this point. You must not make any unfavourable findings against NOA as a result of defence counsel’s suggested failure to challenge NOW about that matter, or take the fact that s/he failed to do so into account when assessing the evidence in this case.


Last updated: 29 June 2015

See Also

4.12 - Failure to Challenge Evidence (Browne v Dunn)

4.12.1 - Charge: Breach of the Rule in Browne v Dunn