Browne v. Dunn Rule — This evidentiary principle applies to consideration during cross-examination. While not a true “rule,” Browne v. Dunn suggests that an opposing party must give the witness of the other party an opportunity to know and explain, if possible, evidence that will be called later to “impeach” that witness’s credibility.
This rule of evidence is named after an 1894 British civil case. It remains one of the primary rules of consideration during cross-examination, although its proper, strategic application is still being debated.
In Browne v. Dunn, the House of Lords found:
Interestingly, this case is the most-requested case, at the Great Library.
Modi v. Paradise Fine Foods Ltd., 2005 HRTO 19 (CanLII) — The principle is applied in a Human Rights Tribunal decision
Greenhalgh v. Douro-Dummer (Township), 2009 CanLII 57148 (ON SC) — Evidence admissibility decision in a civil case.