Is the adjudicator required to explain why she rejected a constable’s evidence?
British Columbia, Canada
The following excerpt is from Walji v. British Columbia (Superintendent of Motor Vehicles), 2016 BCSC 1906 (CanLII):
I am satisfied that the adjudicator provided valid reasons for accepting the constable’s evidence. As a result she was not required to explain why she rejected the petitioner’s evidence (Clark v. British Columbia (Superintendent of Motor Vehicles), 2015 BCCA 487 at para. 29).
"The most advanced legal research software ever built."
The above passage should not be considered legal advice. Reliable answers to complex legal questions require comprehensive research memos. To learn more visit www.alexi.com.
Other Questions
Can an adjudicator give greater weight to a constable’s analysis than that of a motor vehicle constable? (British Columbia, Canada)
In what circumstances will a adjudicator's reasoning be manifestly flawed where the adjudicator failed to consider the evidence supporting the findings of two witnesses? (British Columbia, Canada)
What is the effect of a constable’s evidence at a motor vehicle adjudicator's hearing? (British Columbia, Canada)
Does an adjudicator erred in law in applying his own knowledge and in rejecting the evidence of the petitioner? (British Columbia, Canada)
Is a plaintiff required to lead expert evidence to overcome a no evidence motion? (British Columbia, Canada)
What is the legal test for deference given to an adjudicator in a case where the adjudicator has been found in error? (British Columbia, Canada)
What evidence is required to prove the purpose of the legislation is to infringe aboriginal rights? (British Columbia, Canada)
What is the standard of professional competence required to produce expert evidence in a medical malpractice case? (British Columbia, Canada)
Does a no evidence motion where a real estate agent defendant argued that there was no expert evidence sufficient to establish a standard of care? (British Columbia, Canada)
Can a adjudicator hear evidence that attacks the basis for a 24-hour prohibition issued on November 14, 2015? (British Columbia, Canada)
