Search Results

You are looking at 1 - 10 of 1,427 items :

  • "standard of proof" x
Clear All

1 Introduction The theoretical economics literature on law enforcement has identified multiple factors that affect the optimal standard of proof, and in both directions. A particular focus has been the relationship between the optimal standard of proof and standards commonly used in trials, including preponderance of the evidence . Demougin and Fluet (2006) , for instance, show that in their framework, the preponderance of the evidence standard provides the greatest incentives for tort-feasors to take care. On the other hand, in the criminal setting, Rizzolli

analyze the litigation process in the context of both civil and criminal cases. The conventional models applied to litigation assume the parties’ probability of success in a lawsuit depend upon two main factors: the parties’ respective merits in the case and their litigation efforts ( Katz 1988 ; Hirshleifer 1989 ; Farmer and Pecorino 1999 ; Hirshleifer and Osborne 2001 ). In a typical lawsuit, however, the judge assesses the merits and the relative strength of the evidence presented by the parties. Standards of proof specify the strength of the evidence which a

Volume 7, Issue 2 2009 Article 1 International Commentary on Evidence Re-Thinking the Criminal Standard of Proof: Seeking Consensus about the Utilities of Trial Outcomes Larry Laudan, National Autonomous University of Mexico Harry D. Saunders, Decision Processes Incorporated Recommended Citation: Laudan, Larry and Saunders, Harry D. (2009) "Re-Thinking the Criminal Standard of Proof: Seeking Consensus about the Utilities of Trial Outcomes," International Commentary on Evidence: Vol. 7: Iss. 2, Article 1. DOI: 10.2202/1554-4567.1099 Re-Thinking the Criminal

Volume 5, Issue 1 2007 Article 5 International Commentary on Evidence The Language of Conviction and the Convictions of Certainty: Is 'Sure' an Impossible Standard of Proof? Chris N. Heffer, Cardiff University, Wales Recommended Citation: Heffer, Chris N. (2007) "The Language of Conviction and the Convictions of Certainty: Is 'Sure' an Impossible Standard of Proof?," International Commentary on Evidence: Vol. 5: Iss. 1, Article 5. DOI: 10.2202/1554-4567.1062 The Language of Conviction and the Convictions of Certainty: Is 'Sure' an Impossible Standard of Proof

Prevention of Crime and the Optimal Standard of Proof in Criminal Law HENRIK LANDO* Copenhagen Business School This article determines the optimal standard of proof in criminal law in a trade-off between three costs: the injustice cost of wrong convictions, the injustice cost of wrong acquittals, and the cost to society of the criminal act itself. The standard of proof affects the level of crime through its impact on deterrence. The article applies the expresssion for the optimal standard to the crime of sexual violation against women. While the result must be

chapter seven Selecting Standards of Proof This book thus far has concentrated on identifying the analytical struc-ture of proof for propositions of law. It has pointed out that, whether one realizes it or not, in deciding any question of law one must employ prin- ciples of admissibility, significance, and closure as well as standards and bur- dens of proof. It has said very little about how one should go about selecting such principles and standards. I have shown that principles of admissibility and significance need to be geared to the end that legal

increased awareness in the European Union of private antitrust litigation after the release of the EU Commission’s Green Paper. While it seems generally accepted that private antitrust litigation can be beneficial to an effective competition regime, the dangers and costs associated with abuse of the system by private parties seeking to further their own ends should not be underestimated or blindly dismissed. Melanie Ariane Schwaderer*) Conglomerate Merger Analysis … the Legal Context: How the European Courts’ Standard of Proof put an end to the Ex Ante Assessment of

be addressed first, before issues of social policy come into play. The result otherwise would be a criminal justice system that fails to meet the test of moral justification. KEYWORDS: legal philosophy, epistemology, standard of proof, hearsay, similar fact HL Ho, A Philosophy of Evidence Law: Justice in the Search for Truth (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2008), 368pp, hb £50/$100 Anglo-American legal systems operate with structured rules that govern the evidence that may be admitted at trial, and the use which may be made of that evidence. Other legal

taken up exploring the concept of causation, the burden and standard of proof, and the justification for requiring a causal connection between the defendant’s tortious conduct and the plaintiff’s harm. Actually, Steel’s focus is on why requiring proof of causation is preferable to merely requiring proof that defendant’s tortious conduct created an increased risk of the harm suffered by the victim. S Steel , Proof of Causation in Tort Law (2015) 104–138. (hereafter ‘PoC’). Perhaps the idea of wrongdoers paying for harms that occur without any connection whatsoever