1-20 of 35 Results

  • Keyword: burden of proof x
Clear all

Chapter

This chapter focuses on the burden of proof and presumption of innocence in criminal and civil cases under Article 6 of the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR). It considers the influence of the UK’s Human Rights Act 1998 (HRA) on the allocation of the burden of proof and compares legal/persuasive burden of proof with the evidential burden. It contains a detailed examSination of the case law under this Act and the criteria developed to assess where reverse burdens should apply. It draws on academic commentary in making this analysis. It also looks at situations where the legal and the evidential burden may be split. The leading cases on the standard of proof in civil cases are reviewed.

Chapter

The Concentrate Questions and Answers series offers the best preparation for tackling exam questions. Each book includes typical questions, bullet-pointed answer plans and suggested answers, author commentary and illustrative diagrams and flow charts. This chapter discusses the allocation of the burden of proof in civil and criminal trials, depending on who should bear the risk. In criminal trials the ‘presumption of innocence’ means that the burden is on the prosecution, unless reversed by express or implied statutory provision. The law of evidence safeguards what in some jurisdictions is a civil right backed by the constitution. It is important to understand the difference between the legal and evidential burden and the occasions where they are separately allocated. Tricky areas are where there is a divorce of the legal and evidential burden, primarily in situations where the prosecution cannot expect to put up evidence to anticipate every specific defence the accused may present.

Chapter

Each Concentrate revision guide is packed with essential information, key cases, revision tips, exam Q&As, and more. Concentrates show you what to expect in a law exam, what examiners are looking for, and how to achieve extra marks. This chapter discusses what criminal liability is and is not about; the meaning of burden of proof; and the reform of criminal law. The study of criminal law is the study of liability. It is not about whether a person can be charged with a crime, or what sentence he may face if convicted, but rather it deals with whether a person is innocent or guilty of an offence (ie whether or not he can be convicted). The burden of proof means the requirement on a party to adduce sufficient evidence to persuade the fact-finder (the magistrates or the jury), to a standard set by law, that a particular fact is true.

Chapter

Each Concentrate revision guide is packed with essential information, key cases, revision tips, exam Q&As, and more. Concentrates show you what to expect in a law exam, what examiners are looking for, and how to achieve extra marks. This chapter discusses what criminal liability is and is not about; the meaning of burden of proof; and the reform of criminal law. The study of criminal law is the study of liability. It is not about whether a person can be charged with a crime, or what sentence he may face if convicted, but rather it deals with whether a person is innocent or guilty of an offence (ie whether or not he can be convicted). The burden of proof means the requirement on a party to adduce sufficient evidence to persuade the fact-finder (the magistrates or the jury), to a standard set by law, that a particular fact is true.

Chapter

This chapter focuses on the burden of proof and presumption of innocence in criminal and civil cases under Article 6 of the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR). It considers the influence of the UK’s Human Rights Act 1998 on the allocation of the burden of proof and compares legal/persuasive burden of proof with the evidential burden. It contains a detailed examination of the case law under this Act and the criteria developed to assess where reverse burdens should apply. It draws on academic commentary in making this analysis. It also looks at situations where the legal and the evidential burden may be split. It concludes with an overview of the law on presumptions.

Book

Richard Glover

Murphy on Evidence is firmly established as a leading text for use on undergraduate law courses and in preparation for professional examinations. Frequently consulted by judges and practitioners, and regularly cited in judgments, it has come to be regarded as a work of authority throughout the common law world. The book’s unique approach effectively bridges the gap between academic study of the law of evidence and its application in practice, combining detailed analysis of the law with a wealth of practical information about how it is used in the courtroom. As in previous editions, the author’s teaching method is centred around two realistic case studies—one criminal and one civil—presenting challenging evidence issues and questions for discussion at the end of each chapter. The case study material for this new edition has been further developed with new videos on the Online Resource Centre. Fully up to date with the latest developments in this fast-moving subject, the fifteenth edition of Murphy on Evidence is as indispensable as its predecessors. Topics include: the language of the law of evidence; the judicial function in the law of evidence; the burden and standard of proof; character evidence; and the rule against hearsay.

Chapter

Chapter 2 is divided into two parts. The first part is concerned with the manner in which a dispute as to which party bears the burden of proving a particular issue in a trial should be resolved. The question may arise in a criminal trial as to whether it is the prosecution or defence which bears the burden of proving a certain issue, and in a civil trial as to whether it is the claimant or defendant who bears the burden of proving a certain issue. The second part focuses on the standard to which the burden of proving a particular issue requires to be discharged.

Chapter

Chapter 2 is divided into two parts. The first part is concerned with the manner in which a dispute as to which party bears the burden of proving a particular issue in a trial should be resolved. The question may arise in a criminal trial as to whether it is the prosecution or defence which bears the burden of proving a certain issue, and in a civil trial as to whether it is the claimant or defendant who bears the burden of proving a certain issue. The second part focuses on the standard to which the burden of proving a particular issue requires to be discharged.

Chapter

This first part of the chapter discusses the concept of burden of proof, covering the legal or persuasive burden of proof; the evidential burden; the effect of presumptions on the burden of proof; the legal burden of proof in civil cases; the evidential burden in civil cases; the burden of proof in criminal cases; defence burdens of proof before Lambert; defence burdens of proof after Lambert; and the burden of proof of secondary facts. The second part of the chapter discusses the standard of proof, covering standard of proof required of prosecution in criminal cases; standard of proof required of defence; standard of proof of secondary facts; the standard of proof in civil cases; and the standard of proof in matrimonial and family cases.

Chapter

This chapter considers the burdens borne by both parties when an issue of fact is at stake. It explains how the nature of a burden in the law of evidence is obscured by the use of the term in a number of different senses. The two principal senses are the burden of adducing evidence and the burden of proving facts. In relation to each, questions arise as to its incidence and discharge. The chapter considers the allocation of the burden in these two senses, at common law and under statutory provisions, and the effects of presumptions of law or agreement of the parties. Finally, this chapter is concerned with the extent of the two burdens, and the way in which the burden of proof has to be explained to the jury.

Chapter

Without assuming prior legal knowledge, books in the Directions series introduce and guide readers through key points of law and legal debate. Questions, diagrams, and exercises help readers to engage fully with each subject and check their understanding as they progress. This chapter begins by addressing the question: What is a crime? It then discusses the difference between criminal law, the law of tort, and contract law; the function of criminal law; sources of criminal law; the classification of offences; the criminal justice process; the hierarchy of the criminal courts; the burden and standard of proof; and the elements of an offence.

Chapter

Without assuming prior legal knowledge, books in the Directions series introduce and guide readers through key points of law and legal debate. Questions, diagrams, and exercises help readers to engage fully with each subject and check their understanding as they progress. This chapter begins by addressing the question: What is a crime? It then discusses the difference between criminal law, the law of tort, and contract law; the function of criminal law; sources of criminal law; the classification of offences; the criminal justice process; the hierarchy of the criminal courts; the burden and standard of proof; and the elements of an offence.

Chapter

Titles in the Core Text series take the reader straight to the heart of the subject, providing focused, concise, and reliable guides for students at all levels. This chapter discusses the following: criminal and civil burdens of proof; the ‘legal burden of proof’ and the ‘evidential burden’; the ‘tactical burden’; the prosecution’s legal burden of proof in criminal cases; when the defendant in a criminal case bears the legal burden of proof; the standard of proof; the evidential burden; the judge’s ‘invisible burden’; the burden of proof when establishing the admissibility of evidence; presumptions and the incidence of the burden of proof; and reversal of the burden of proof and the European Convention on Human Rights.

Chapter

Titles in the Core Text series take the reader straight to the heart of the subject, providing focused, concise, and reliable guides for students at all levels. This chapter discusses the following: criminal and civil burdens of proof; the ‘legal burden of proof’ and the ‘evidential burden’; the ‘tactical burden’; the prosecution’s legal burden of proof in criminal cases; when the defendant in a criminal case bears the legal burden of proof; the standard of proof; the evidential burden; the judge’s ‘invisible burden’; the burden of proof when establishing the admissibility of evidence; presumptions and the incidence of the burden of proof; and reversal of the burden of proof and the European Convention on Human Rights.

Chapter

D Fox, RJC Munday, B Soyer, AM Tettenborn, and PG Turner

This chapter deals with bailment, defined as a transaction under which a bailee lawfully receives possession of goods from a bailor for some purpose. Examples of bailment from commercial law include warehousing, carriage, the deposit of property to have work done on it, leasing, and pledge. A buyer under a sale or return transaction is, pending acceptance or rejection, a bailee of the goods. After explaining what a bailment is, the chapter considers types of bailment and three requirements for a bailment: transfer of possession; ownership remaining in the bailor, or at least not passing to the bailee; and consent by the bailee. It then examines the bailee’s liability and the burden of proof with respect to bailment before concluding with an analysis of bailment involving third parties, focusing in particular on sub-bailment.

Chapter

This chapter explains the rules governing the legal and evidential burdens of proof that decide which party has the responsibility of proving a fact in issue to the court. It then discusses the degree of persuasiveness the evidence must attain to satisfy the appropriate standard of proof including the test for a successful submission of no case to answer and considers the human rights issues in those exceptional situations where the accused has the legal burden of proof. For both the prosecution and the defence, the rules that allocate the burden of proof and the degree of proof are fundamental to the outcome of a case at trial.

Chapter

Martin Hannibal and Lisa Mountford

This chapter explains the rules governing the legal and evidential burdens of proof that decide which party has the responsibility of proving a fact in issue to the court. It then discusses the degree of persuasiveness the evidence must attain to satisfy the appropriate standard of proof including the test for a successful submission of no case to answer and considers the human rights issues in those exceptional situations where the accused has the legal burden of proof. For both the prosecution and the defence, the rules that allocate the burden of proof and the degree of proof are fundamental to the outcome of a case at trial.

Chapter

Sir William Wade and Christopher Forsyth

This chapter begins with a discussion of collateral proceedings, identifying the situations in which the court will and will not allow the issue of invalidity to be raised. It then explains the rules on partial invalidity, standard and burden of proof, and invalid and void administrative acts.

Chapter

David Ormerod and Karl Laird

This chapter considers the most commonly occurring ‘mental condition defences’, focusing on the pleas of insanity, intoxication and mistake. The common law historically made a distinction between justification and excuse, at least in relation to homicide. It is said that justification relates to the rightness of the act but to excuse as to the circumstances of the individual actor. The chapter examines the relationship between mental condition defences, insanity and unfitness to be tried, and explains the Law Commission’s most recent recommendations for reforming unfitness and other mental condition defences. It explores the test of insanity, disease of the mind (insanity) versus external factor (sane automatism), insane delusions and insanity, burden of proof, function of the jury, self-induced automatism, intoxication as a denial of criminal responsibility, voluntary and involuntary intoxication, dangerous or non-dangerous drugs in basic intent crime and intoxication induced with the intention of committing crime.

Chapter

This chapter considers the most commonly occurring ‘mental condition defences’, focusing on the pleas of insanity, intoxication, and mistake. The common law historically made a distinction between justification and excuse, at least in relation to homicide. It is said that justification relates to the rightness of the act but excuse to the circumstances of the individual actor. The chapter examines the relationship between mental condition defences, insanity, and unfitness to be tried, and explains the Law Commission’s most recent recommendations for reforming unfitness and other mental condition defences. It explores the test of insanity, disease of the mind (insanity) versus external factor (sane automatism), insane delusions and insanity, burden of proof, function of the jury, self-induced automatism, intoxication as a denial of criminal responsibility, voluntary and involuntary intoxication, dangerous or non-dangerous drugs in basic intent crime, and intoxication induced with the intention of committing crime.