what is an evidential burden course hero

What is evidential burden?

An evidential burden compels a party to produce evidence in support of an issue it seeks to raise, failing which the party shall not be permitted to raise it at all. This burden can rest on either party, although it usually relates to matters of defence raised by the accused. Some defences impose an evidential burden on the defendant.

Why is evidential burden important?

The reason for imposing an evidential burden is to ensure the prosecution does not have to disprove all imaginable defences, only those properly supported by sufficient evidence. Lord Morris of Borth-y-Gest said in Bratty v Attorney-General for Northern Ireland:

What is the burden of proof?

If the evidential burden is met, the prosecution then bears the burden of proof (which is not called an evidential burden). For example, if a person charged with murder pleads self-defence, the defendant must satisfy the evidential burden that there is some evidence suggesting self-defence. The burden of proof then falls on ...

What was the House of Lords opinion on the Provocation case?

The House of Lords held that in the absence of any evidence, emerging from whatever source, which suggested the reasonable possibility that the defendant might have lost his self-control due to provoking conduct , the question of provocation did not arise and should not be put to the jury. On the facts, there was no evidence of the nature of the provocation and the jury could not, therefore, determine the relevant conditions necessary for provocation. The appeal was therefore dismissed.

What is the legal burden?

A legal burden is determined by substantive law, rests upon one party and never shifts. The satisfaction of the evidential burden has sometimes been described as "shifting the burden of proof", a label which has been criticized because the burden placed on a defendant is not the legal burden of proof resting on the prosecution.

What was the defendant charged with in R v Acott?

In R v Acott, the defendant was charged with murdering his mother. He claimed his mother was injured in a fall, but the medical evidence demonstrated that the deceased died because of a sustained attack and was indicative of a possible loss of self-control from the defendant. The trial judge did not leave the issue of provocation to the jury, and the defendant was eventually convicted. The defendant's appeal to the Court of Appeal was dismissed and he appealed to the House of Lords, the issue being:

What is the production burden?

Jump to navigation Jump to search. Evidential burden or "production burden" is the obligation to produce evidence to properly raise an issue at trial. Failure to satisfy the evidential burden means that an issue cannot be raised at a court of law.

Who bears the legal burden?

This is why the Prosecution is said to bear the legal burden. It is the Prosecution team that bears the burden of demonstrating to the court that the accused A murdered the victim. The accused does not have to say a thing in his defence. If the Prosecution has not discharged the burden, the accused does not have to say anything: on those rare ...

What happens if the prosecution has not discharged the burden?

If the Prosecution has not discharged the burden, the accused does not have to say anything: on those rare occasions, the judge will simply acquit the defendant, ‘without calling the defence’. So that is the legal burden.

What is the argument that if the prosecution can produce 90% evidence, then the case has been proven to be?

So – the quantifiers argue – where the Prosecution can produce 90% evidence, then the case has been proven to be ‘beyond a reasonable doubt.’

What is the standard of proof in a murder trial?

There is a lot of evidence in the murder trial. But the quality of the evidence must cross a line. That line is called the ‘standard of proof’. It is also called the ‘evidential burden of proof’. Suppose the Prosecution took all of its evidence – which has not been weakened by cross-examination – and were to set it one on top of another, ...

What does "murderer beyond doubt" mean?

It means that the prosecution evidence puts the question of who murdered the victim beyond doubt.

What is the height of the required evidence?

The height of the required evidence is the ‘standard of proof’. If the prosecution cannot pass over that hurdle, it is said not to have proven ‘its standard.’. In criminal cases that required ‘height’ is called ‘beyond a reasonable doubt’. It means that the prosecution evidence puts the question of who murdered the victim beyond doubt.

What is the standard in civil cases?

Civil cases. In a civil case, the standard (or ‘height’) is lower. It is on a ‘balance of probabilities’. The quantifiers argue that this amounts to only 51% proof.

Who has the legal burden in a civil case?

In Civil Cases, not criminal, the plaintiff has the legal burden (the task of proving the case). The ‘onus’ (responsibility) is on the plaintiff who starts the case, to prove facts or issues in the case to the required standard of proof.

What is the standard of proof in civil cases?

In civil cases the standard of proof is the balance of probabilities. The plaintiff must prove that it is more likely than not to have occurred in order to obtain judgment in their favour.

What does the Crown have to prove?

In criminal cases the Crown must prove the accused’s guilt beyond reasonable doubt. This is the high standard of proof that the Crown must achieve before a conviction and the words mean exactly what they say — proof beyond reasonable doubt.

What is the duty of the court in a criminal case?

Whether it’s a criminal matter or a civil case it is the responsibility of the Court (which means the magistrates or judge, or the jury if there is one) to make the decision that the evidence has met the required standard of proof. It must be clear that the Court has applied the correct test of the evidence. Failure to apply the correct test of the evidence can give rise to a ground of appeal against conviction. In the Crown Court, the evidence that the correct test has been applied derives from the judges summing up of the evidence and the directions the judge gives to the jury to help it apply the law to the facts.

Where are civil cases dealt with in England?

In England and Wales civil cases are mainly dealt with in the County Court or, in more substantial or complex cases, the High Court. They can range from quite small or simple claims, for example damaged goods or recovery of debt, to large claims between multi-national companies.

What is the evidential burden in Chapter 2?

Chapter 2 contains no definition of “evidential burden” in relation to proof of elements of the offence by the prosecution. Section 13.3 (6) defines “evidential burden” in relation to “matters”, not “ele- ments” and it occurs in a section which is specifically directed to the evidential burden resting on the defence.

What is evidential burden?

evidential burden, in relation to a matter, means the burden of adducing or pointing to evidence that suggests a reasonable possibility that the matter exists or does not exist.

What is a note indicating defences?

Notes indicating defences: s21 (1A) provides defences of reasonable excuse and incapacity for compliance. The provision is followed by the note: “A defendant bears an evidential burden in relation to the matters in subsection [ (2) or (2A)] (see subsection 13.3 (3) of the Criminal Code ).”

Is a mistake or ignorance of fact a defence?

In earlier sections of the commentary, it was suggested that s9.1 Mistake or ignorance of fact (fault elements other than negligence) is not in fact a defence at all.

Is the defendant required to bear the evidential burden when relying on reasonable excuses?

For example, the defendant is required to bear the evidential burden when relying on “reasonable excuse”, a defence frequently employed in federal legislation. 398 In general, excuses and justifications are readily recognisable. That cannot be said of exceptions, exemptions and qualifications.

Overview

Definition

Evidential burden has been described as the obligation "to show, if called upon to do so, that there is sufficient evidence to raise an issue as to the existence or non-existence of a fact in issue, due regard being had to the standard of proof demanded of the party under such obligation".
Lord Bingham said that evidential burden is not a burden of proof, but rather a burden of raising an issue as to the matter in question fit for consideration by the tribunal of fact. In the criminal law …

Case example

Rationale

Human rights law

See also