header-logo header-logo

31 July 2008 / David Mason
Issue: 7332 / Categories: Features , Procedure & practice
printer mail-detail

The lioness in Regent's Park

David Mason revisits the civil standard of proof

In Life Sentences Review Commissioners v D [2008] UKHL 33, [2008] All ER (D) 119 (Jun), the House of Lords has again explained the controversial issue of the standard of proof required in cases where the criminal standard does not apply. The standard of proof in criminal cases has historically been that the case should be proved so that the jury was sure of guilt. The civil standard has been traditionally that the case must be proved on a balance of probabilities, that is that the fact to be proved is more likely than not. Until the case of Re H (Minors) Sexual Abuse: Standard of Proof [1996] 1 All ER 1 was decided by the House of Lords, the existence of a mysterious third standard was speculated upon, but not defined.

Re H concerned the standard of proof required in child care cases. The consequences for parents and children of findings of sexual abuse are serious. How parents are to be protected against the

If you are not a subscriber, subscribe now to read this content
If you are already a subscriber sign in
...or Register for two weeks' free access to subscriber content

MOVERS & SHAKERS

NLJ Career Profile: Ken Fowlie, Stowe Family Law

NLJ Career Profile: Ken Fowlie, Stowe Family Law

Ken Fowlie, chairman of Stowe Family Law, reflects on more than 30 years in legal services after ‘falling into law’

Gardner Leader—Michelle Morgan & Catherine Morris

Gardner Leader—Michelle Morgan & Catherine Morris

Regional law firm expands employment team with partner and senior associate hires

Freeths—Carly Harwood & Tom Newton

Freeths—Carly Harwood & Tom Newton

Nottinghamtrusts, estates and tax team welcomes two senior associates

NEWS
Children can claim for ‘lost years’ damages in personal injury cases, the Supreme Court has held in a landmark judgment
The cab-rank rule remains a bulwark of the rule of law, yet lawyers are increasingly judged by their clients’ causes. Writing in NLJ this week, Ian McDougall, president of the LexisNexis Rule of Law Foundation, warns that conflating representation with endorsement is a ‘clear and present danger’
Holiday lets may promise easy returns, but restrictive covenants can swiftly scupper plans. Writing in NLJ this week, Andrew Francis of Serle Court recounts how covenants limiting use to a ‘private dwelling house’ or ‘private residence’ have repeatedly defeated short-term letting schemes
Artificial intelligence (AI) is already embedded in the civil courts, but regulation lags behind practice. Writing in NLJ this week, Ben Roe of Baker McKenzie charts a landscape where AI assists with transcription, case management and document handling, yet raises acute concerns over evidence, advocacy and even judgment-writing
The Supreme Court has drawn a firm line under branding creativity in regulated markets. In Dairy UK Ltd v Oatly AB, it ruled that Oatly’s ‘post-milk generation’ trade mark unlawfully deployed a protected dairy designation. In NLJ this week, Asima Rana of DWF explains that the court prioritised ‘regulatory clarity over creative branding choices’, holding that ‘designation’ extends beyond product names to marketing slogans
back-to-top-scroll