In civil cases involving monetary claims for damages, breaches of contract, or tort actions, understanding the concepts of onus of proof and burden of proof is essential. They dictate how evidence is presented and assessed by the Court, ultimately affecting the case’s outcome.
The Onus of Proof
The onus of proof refers to the obligation of a party to prove the allegations they assert. In civil matters, the onus of proof rests on the party making the allegation. For instance, if a Plaintiff alleges negligence, then the onus is on the Plaintiff to prove negligence.
What this means is that the Plaintiff must establish the validity of their claim by presenting sufficient evidence to support their allegations against the Defendant.
The more compelling the evidence, the easier it will be for the Plaintiff to convince the Court of the truth and plausibility of the claim.
While the onus of proof typically rests with the Plaintiff, this is not to say that there aren’t situations where it can shift to the Defendant. For example, once a matter is defended or a counterclaim is issued, the Defendant bears an evidential burden – the burden of adducing or pointing to evidence that supports their position. Further, a Defendant who wishes to rely on an exemption, defence, or justification provided by the law bears the onus of proof.
My colleague, Vincent Hui, previously circulated a bulletin on a specific example of the defence of “inevitable accidents”, which is worth revisiting here. An inevitable accident defence raised by a Defendant is a good example where the onus of proof shifts to a Defendant to prove an “inevitable accident”.
The Burden of Proof
The burden of proof refers to the level of certainty required for a party to prevail. In contrast to criminal matters, civil trials are determined on the balance of probabilities, which focuses on the weight and credibility of the evidence rather than absolute certainty. This essentially means that the evidence must show that something is more likely true than not.
Implications
In summary, the onus and burden of proof in civil monetary disputes have significant implications for both Plaintiffs and Defendants:
- For Plaintiffs, they must gather compelling evidence, which can include documents, witness testimonies, and expert opinion, to meet the preponderance standard. Failure to do so can result in the dismissal of their claim.
- For Defendants, they can challenge the Plaintiff’s evidence and present their own evidence to refute the Plaintiff’s claim.
The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specific advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.
