The Ontario Court of Appeal allowed the appeal, holding there was no Browne v. Dunn breach and that the corrective instruction was overbroad; a new trial was ordered.
Majority: Even if the trial judge erred in giving a Vetrovec warning in relation to Nathan Johnson, defence counsel expressly agreed to the warning, the judge properly instructed the jury that if they believed Johnson or were left in reasonable doubt by his evidence they must acquit, and there is no reasonable possibility the verdict would have been different; therefore any error was harmless and the curative proviso applies so the appeal is dismissed. Dissent: the Vetrovec warning improperly applied to an exculpatory Crown witness, may have shifted the burden and cannot be cured by the provi…