Standard of proof Definition

GLOSSARY

What does Standard of proof mean?

Matters requiring proof must be established to the appropriate standard, namely either on the balance of probabilities or beyond reasonable doubt.

In civil cases, the appropriate standard of proof is the balance of probabilities (or, in other words, whether the tribunal of fact is satisfied that it is more likely than not that the relevant facts occurred). In criminal cases, the appropriate standard of proof is beyond reasonable doubt (or, in other words, whether the tribunal of fact can be sure that the relevant facts have been proved).

View the related checklists about Standard of proof

Considerations and next steps for victims of fraud—checklist

Considerations and next steps for victims of fraud—checklist This Checklist is designed to assist individuals and companies who suspect they have been a victim of fraud. It considers the immediate steps they should take to gather and preserve evidence, obtain legal advice, mitigate and reduce risk and obtain emergency or urgent relief (such as freezing orders and insurance cover), including whether it is necessary to report a suspected fraud to the police and how to do so using the Action Fraud service. It also addresses the choice between issuing civil and criminal proceedings for fraud and explains the possibility of running a civil fraud claim in parallel with a criminal prosecution (private or public). This Checklist should be read in conjunction with the Practice Notes: • Starting a civil fraud claim—a practical guide • Civil fraud—heads of claim • Civil fraud—frequently asked questions (FAQ) • Commencing criminal proceedings—applying for the issue of a summons • Fraud—civil claim and private criminal prosecution compared For full guidance on fraud offence under criminal...

Pre Inquest Review (PIR) hearings—checklist

Pre Inquest Review (PIR) hearings—checklist It has become commonplace to hold a pre inquest review hearing (PIR) or several if deemed necessary to ensure the case is managed efficiently and to resolve an evidential issues which may occur. Rule 6 of The Coroners (Inquests) Rules 2013 (CIR 2013) gives the coroner statutory authority to hold a PIR 'at any time during the course of an investigation'. If the coroner does not take the initiative to arrange one, those representing the interested persons (IPs) should call for a PIR to be listed. The Chief Coroner’s guidance states that PIRs should be held in complex investigations. The function of a PIR is comparable to a Case Management Conference in civil litigation or a Plea and Trial Preparation Hearing in the Crown Court. For information on preparing for an inquest, see Practice Note: How to prepare for an inquest. PIRs should be held in public and details of the PIR should be published in advance on the coroner/local authority website to...

Burden and standard of proof in criminal proceedings

There are two kinds of ‘burden’ in criminal proceedings:•the legal burden, and•the evidential burdenThe legal burdenA party has the legal (sometimes called ‘the persuasive’) burden where the onus is on that party to prove a fact or issue in a case to the required standard of proof.The legal burden is generally on the prosecution (subject to certain exceptions as explained below). This means that where the defendant pleads not guilty, the prosecution have the burden of proving all the elements of the offence (eg the identity of the defendant, the nature of the act, the existence of any necessary knowledge or intent and the negating of any defences which are raised). It includes proving negative elements of an offence (eg lack of consent in a rape or assault case). It is for the jury or magistrates to determine whether the burden has been discharged.Whichever decision making tribunal is responsible for making this decision, it must be clear that it has applied the correct test. Failures in this regard can give...

General Optical Council—fitness to practise proceedings

General Optical Council—fitness to practise proceedings Who is the General Optical Council (GOC) The General Optical Council (GOC) is a body corporate created by the Opticians Act 1989 (OA 1989) to have the general function of promoting high standards of professional education, conduct and performance with an over-arching objective of the protection of the public. The GOC role is to protect, promote and maintain: • the health, safety and well-being of the public • public confidence in the professions they regulate • professional standards and conduct for Registrants and prospective Registrants, and • proper standards and conduct for business Registrants This Practice Note provides a guide to GOC fitness to practise proceedings, investigations, and applications to be restored to the Register. The GOC regulates registered Optometrists as well as Dispensing Opticians. In this Practice Note a ‘Registrant’ is: • a registered Optometrist • dispensing Optician • student Optometrists, or • a Registered Business This Practice Note should be read in conjunction with Practice Notes: Common principles in fitness to practise...

Discover our 347 Practice Notes on Standard of proof

Memorandum on directors’ responsibilities, obligations and potential liabilities in respect of a prospectus—Main Market

Memorandum on directors’ responsibilities, obligations and potential liabilities in respect of a prospectus—Main Market 1 Introduction 1.1 This memorandum has been prepared for those persons who are to be named in the prospectus to be published by [insert name of company] (the Company) as directors or proposed directors of the Company (the Directors) in connection with the application for admission to listing of the ordinary shares of the Company on the Official List of the Financial Conduct Authority (FCA) and to trading on the Main Market of the London Stock Exchange plc (LSE) (the Admission). 1.2 A prospectus is required to be published by the Company in connection with the application for Admission. The prospectus must be submitted to and approved by the FCA before it is published. The Directors (among others) are responsible for the contents of the prospectus and a statement that each Director takes responsibility must be included in the prospectus. 1.3 This memorandum summarises the responsibilities, obligations and potential liabilities faced by the...

Memorandum on directors’ responsibilities and potential liabilities in respect of an AIM admission document

Memorandum on directors’ responsibilities and potential liabilities in respect of an AIM admission document 1 Introduction 1.1 This memorandum has been prepared for those persons who are to be named in the document to be published by [insert name of company] (the Company) as directors or proposed directors of the Company (the Directors) in connection with the proposed admission (the Admission) of the ordinary shares of the Company to trading on AIM, a market operated by the London Stock Exchange plc (the LSE). 1.2 An AIM admission document (the Admission Document) is required to be prepared by the Company in connection with the application for the Admission. The Admission Document will disclose financial and other information about the Company[ and its subsidiaries] and must be prepared in accordance with the requirements of the AIM Rules for Companies published by the LSE (the AIM Rules). 1.3 The Directors (among others) are responsible for the contents of the Admission Document and a...

Dive into our 2 Precedents related to Standard of proof

In financial remedy proceedings, where the husband has credit cards that are in his sole name but were used for the benefit of the family by way of general family living expenses during a long marriage, is the onus on the husband to prove that the credit cards debts are family debts or is it on the wife to prove that they are not family debts and were used solely for the benefit of the husband?

In financial remedy proceedings, where the husband has credit cards that are in his sole name but were used for the benefit of the family by way of general family living expenses during a long marriage, is the onus on the husband to prove that the credit cards debts are family debts or is it on the wife to prove that they are not family debts and were used solely for the benefit of the husband? The question raises the not uncommon scenario within financial remedy proceedings of how to treat debts. A distinction is drawn between debts incurred for the benefit of the family and debts not so incurred (this may included debts incurred both during the marriage and post-separation). There is the perception that the former are treated more sympathetically than the latter, although both may be considered within the concept of financial needs pursuant to section 25(2)(b) of the Matrimonial Causes Act 1973 (MCA 1973). We have not been able to find specific authority for...

When preparing a threshold statement involving allegations of radicalisation what evidence should be included?

When preparing a threshold statement involving allegations of radicalisation what evidence should be included? There are a number of recent radicalisation cases. In Tower Hamlets LBC v B, Hayden J, noting that this was a developing area of law where there was little guidance available, considered reliance on ‘conventional safe-guarding’ to be applicable. In Re K, Hayden J rejected any notion that there was any elevated standard of proof to be met in radicalisation cases as opposed to other cases: it remains on the balance of probabilities applied on a common sense basis (see X below). In answering the question one may have regard to the first principles of preparing a threshold statement espoused by Munby PFD in Re A (A Child). Within its threshold, the local authority will need to identify the facts it seeks to prove. There will also need to be a causative link between the facts relied upon and the harm to the child which is alleged. In X...

See the 20 Q&As about Standard of proof

As LCF execs receive hefty bills, attention shifts to UK SFO probe

A London judge’s order that London Capital & Finance (LCF) executives pay £180m for their roles in the collapse of the ‘Ponzi scheme’ has closed another chapter in the long-running saga. Attention will now turn to the Serious Fraud Office’s (SFO’s) efforts to bring charges in the case. The SFO has been investigating the case since 2019, and will have followed the civil case closely.

Amendments to UK sanctions legislation

Corporate Crime analysis: The Sanctions (EU Exit) (Miscellaneous Amendments) (No 2) Regulations 2024 , SI 2024/1157 (the Amending Regulations) were enacted under the Sanctions and Anti-Money Laundering Act 2018 (SAMLA 2018) on 12 November 2024. The Amending Regulations vary and (in certain regimes) extend existing legislative provisions dealing with reporting requirements, licensing grounds, statutory exceptions to prohibitions and other ancillary matters across the UK’s financial and trade sanction regimes enacted under SAMLA 2018 (including the global human rights, anti-terrorism, counterterrorism, cyber and chemical weapons regimes). In addition to these overarching amendments, several changes are made to the Russia (Sanctions) (EU Exit) Regulations 2019 (the ‘Russia Regulations’), as explored further below. Written by Diana Czugler & Jake Eddison-Cook at Peters & Peters Solicitors LLP.

Read the latest 406 News articles on Standard of proof

Speed up all aspects of your legal work with tools that help you to work faster and smarter. Win cases, close deals and grow your business–all whilst saving time and reducing risk.

Case studies

"The forms and precedents section is essential so that I can quickly and easily look up provisions to include in templates or bespoke project contracts."

RWE

Access all documents on Standard of proof

GET ACCESS NOW

Top

Trial

UU��ֱ��

GLOSSARY