How does the adjudicator resolve differences or conflicts in evidence?
British Columbia, Canada
The following excerpt is from Earl v. British Columbia (Superintendent of Motor Vehicles), 2016 BCSC 340 (CanLII):
An adjudicator may resolve differences or conflicts in evidence by: i. giving reasons why one version is accepted; ii. giving reasons why the other version is not accepted; or iii. giving reasons why one version is preferred over the other. Clark v. British Columbia (Superintendent of Motor Vehicles), 2015 BCCA 487 at para. 28.
"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
When is an adjudicator able to resolve a conflict between two conflicting stories? (British Columbia, Canada)
What are the principles that will govern the court's approach to assessing evidence where there are significantly different versions of the evidence? (British Columbia, Canada)
In what circumstances will a summary trial judge be able to resolve issues where there are conflicting evidence? (British Columbia, Canada)
Is it appropriate to re-open a hearing to receive oral evidence in cases of conflicting evidence? (British Columbia, Canada)
How can an adjudicator make findings of fact and credibility issues on conflicting evidence? (British Columbia, Canada)
What is the difference between "new evidence" and “new evidence” at trial? (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)
How has the adjudicator dealt with conflicting evidence central to the determination of whether the officer honestly suspected the respondent had alcohol in his body at the time of the stop? (British Columbia, Canada)
What is the difference between a no evidence motion and an insufficient evidence motion? (British Columbia, Canada)
What are the principles governing the court’s approach to assessing evidence where there are significantly different versions of the evidence? (British Columbia, Canada)
