Evidence Act · s 102

Suggest a correction

Tell us what is wrong in this text. We check every suggestion against the official version before we change anything.

What is wrong?Wrong or mistyped wordsWrong structure or numberingWrong title or detailsText that appears twice

What should change, and whyUp to 2,000 characters.The text as it should read (optional)Edit the text above. Up to 20,000 characters.Where you checked it (optional)A link to the official version, if you have one.

The text as we hold it

Open the official text

s 102On whom burden of proof lies

The burden of proof in a suit or proceedings lies on that person who would fail if no evidence at all were given on either side.

Evidence

Illustrations

(a)

A sues B for land of which B is in possession, and which, as A asserts, was left to A by the will of C, B’s father.

If no evidence were given on either side, B would be entitled to his possession.

Therefore, the burden of proof is on A.

(b)

A sues B for money due on a bond.

The execution of the bond is admitted, but B says that it was obtained by fraud, which A denies.

If no evidence were given on either side, A would succeed as the bond is not disputed and the fraud is not proved.

Therefore, the burden of proof is on B.