The Adjudicator was entitled to prefer the unsworn evidence found in the police report to the sworn evidence of the petitioner and his witnesses. There was no obligation on the Adjudicator to cross-examine the petitioner or his witnesses. The petitioner chose the nature of the evidence that it put before the Adjudicator. That evidence, as found by the Adjudicator, contained several inconsistencies and omissions. The Adjudicator is under no obligation to determine the answers to the questions raised by the petitioner’s material. Her obligation was to weigh the relevant evidence and information placed before her. See: Lucas v. British Columbia (Superintendent of Motor Vehicles), [2002] B.C.J. No. 462 (S.C.). THE DECISION WAS PATENTLY UNREASONABLE ON ITS FACE
"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.