In civil matters, the burden of proof is key in the Australian justice system. It’s the guide for judges to decide who has to prove their case and therefore who gets a fair and sensible outcome.
In simple terms, the burden of proof means the obligation to prove your claims or allegations. The party with the burden of proof must:
- Produce evidence; and
- Persuade the court or tribunal that their version is more likely to be true
In civil matters, the burden of proof usually lies with the plaintiff who is seeking remedy or compensation. But the burden of proof can switch between parties during different stages of the case.
In this article, we will go through the burden of proof in civil matters in Australia. From the standard of proof to the challenges for plaintiffs, we will cover it all.
What’s the Burden of Proof in Civil Cases?
The burden of proof in a civil case is different from a criminal case. The balance of probabilities applies. This means a party must prove more likely than not. The criminal standard—beyond a reasonable doubt—requires a higher level of proof. Beyond a reasonable doubt means the prosecution must convince the jury that the evidence at trial leaves no other reasonable explanation.
But the balance of probabilities allows judges to:
- Weigh the evidence; and
- Decide which party’s case is more persuasive.
This prevents an unfair burden that a higher standard would impose in civil cases.
Plaintiff’s Burden of Proof
The plaintiff has the burden of proof in civil matters in Australia. The plaintiff is the one who commences the proceedings and is trying to prove their case against the defendant. To satisfy the burden of proof, the plaintiff must produce evidence that persuades the judge.
They must base this on the balance of probabilities that their version is more likely to be true than not. The evidence must support each part of their claim, which can vary depending on the type of case.
Let’s use a personal injury case as an example. The plaintiff in this case must prove the defendant owed them a duty of care and breached that duty and may escape criminal liability. As a result, the breach caused them harm or injury. Each part must be proven with evidence such as:
- Medical records
- Witness testimony; or
- Expert opinions
It’s the plaintiff’s job to convince the court with that evidence that their claim is more likely than not.
Burden of Proof in Civil Cases Can Shift
While the burden of proof usually lies with the plaintiff, there are times when it can switch to the defendant. One example is when the defendant raises a counterclaim against the plaintiff. In that case the defendant becomes a claimant, and the burden of proof shifts to them to prove their counterclaim.
This allows both parties to present their case and produce evidence to support their position. Certain statutory provisions or common law principles can also cause the burden of proof to switch. Let’s use another example in discrimination cases.
What happens when the plaintiff proves a prima facie case (cases that are accepted as true at first instance) of discrimination? If that’s the case, the burden of proof switches to the defendant to prove their actions were not discriminatory. These switches in the burden of proof are to balance the scales of justice.
Evidence and the Burden of Proof
Evidence is key to the burden of proof in civil cases. The evidence must be credible, reliable, and relevant to the issues. Parties use various types to adduce sufficient evidence, which include:
- Documents
- Photographs
- Expert opinions ; and
- Witness testimony (For example, a witness said a person committed an act of grave moral turpitude)
It’s important to note the quality of evidence can make a big difference to the judge’s decision. This is because the judge will evaluate the evidence from both parties. They may also test its credibility and weight.
Morevero, it’s the judge’s job to weigh the evidence and decide who has met the burden of proof. So parties must present their evidence clearly and persuasively to increase their chances of winning.
Challenges and Strategies
Meeting the burden of proof in civil cases is tough for plaintiffs. They must overcome many hurdles to convince the court of their case. One of the biggest challenges is the need for more direct evidence, especially in cases of complex or historical events.
Plaintiffs may use circumstantial evidence, expert testimony, or inferences to prove their case. To overcome these challenges, plaintiffs use strategies like thorough investigation, diligent collection of evidence, and expert opinions.
Expert witnesses can provide specialized knowledge and help explain complex matters to the court. A well-prepared and persuasive case can tip the scales in favour of the plaintiff and make it more likely than not that their version of events is true.
Judicial Evaluation of Evidence
Judges play a big role in evaluating the evidence in civil cases. They evaluate the credibility of witnesses, consider the reliability of documents, and weigh the persuasive power of expert opinions. Judges use their expertise and impartiality to decide who met the burden of proof.
In this evaluation, judges must be impartial and base their decision on the evidence only. They are not bound by the rules of evidence but will use their discretion to admit relevant and reliable evidence. Judges will consider the probative value of each piece of evidential burden and decide based on the balance of probabilities.
Consequences of Not Meeting the Burden of Proof
Not meeting the burden of proof in civil cases can have big consequences for the party who bears the burden. If the plaintiff fails to prove their case, the court may rule in favour of the defendant. So the plaintiff may not get the judgement, damages, or other relief they are seeking.
And the party who fails to meet the burden of proof may also be ordered to pay the costs of the other party. This is why it’s important to present a strong case with enough evidence to support your claims.
Seeking Legal Advice and Civil Litigation
The burden is on the party who starts the action to prove their case on the balance of probabilities. While the burden applies to civil cases only, its relevance extends to criminal law matters where different standards of proof apply.
That’s why it’s best to seek legal advice from an expert law firm like JB Solicitors. We can assist in civil and criminal offence matters if you are facing legal action in a court proceeding or criminal trials. Our lawyers can also do out-of-court negotiations if the parties are willing to settle for less costly resolution.
Contact a Sydney criminal lawyer today if you need help with the legal burden of proof in civil cases and criminal cases.
Last updated: 23 December 2024
