It's a Pope thing
Language: English Series: Building ; 270(8378) 22 April 2005, 58-59(2)Publication details: 2005Subject(s): Summary: Discusses the problems associated with deciding burden of proof in the context of "Stephens v Cannon" ([2005] EWCA Civ 222, Abs68867), where the trial judge was unable to decide which side's expert evidence should be favoured. He decided for the defendant but the claimant appealed. The CA said that not striving to make a decision was excusable in exceptional cases, but if the adjudicator or summary arbitrator cannot decide then there should be a full reasoned explanation as to what the processes were.| Item type | Current library | Call number | Copy number | Status | Barcode | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Journal article | London Journal article | L129635 (Browse shelf(Opens below)) | 1 | Available | 129635-1001 |
Discusses the problems associated with deciding burden of proof in the context of "Stephens v Cannon" ([2005] EWCA Civ 222, Abs68867), where the trial judge was unable to decide which side's expert evidence should be favoured. He decided for the defendant but the claimant appealed. The CA said that not striving to make a decision was excusable in exceptional cases, but if the adjudicator or summary arbitrator cannot decide then there should be a full reasoned explanation as to what the processes were.