In most personal injury cases, there are several factors that come into play. One of them involves the burden of proof. The courts must see proof that the defendant was at fault in order to find them liable for the injuries caused. But who has the burden of proof? The plaintiff or the defendant? Read on to find out.
What is the meaning of “burden of proof?”
The burden of proof is a legal term that refers to the obligation of a party in a lawsuit to provide sufficient evidence to justify or uphold their claim.
Specifically, the “burden of proof” is the obligation on one side in a trial requiring them to prove their version of events by presenting admissible evidence, which appears sufficiently credible and convincing as compared with the opposing side’s presentation of contrary evidence.
Who has the burden of proof?
The general rule is that whoever makes an assertion in a legal action has the burden to prove it. The “burden” simply means risk or duty, and refers only to the necessity of producing evidence on a given issue; once that hurdle is overcome with sufficient evidence, then the party with that burden of proof is usually said to have discharged it.
Typically, in personal injury cases, the prosecution or plaintiff has the burden of proof because they are asserting that someone else is at fault. They must be able to prove it with credible and admissible evidence in order for their claim to get substantiated. Defendants are not obligated to present any evidence unless they want to raise an affirmative defense or mitigating circumstances.
If you find yourself pressing charges in a personal injury case, you want to make sure that your claim gets justified. That means being able to prove your version of events with sufficient, admissible evidence.