Miller v Minister of Pensions
1947 · 2 All ER 372
Posted By lanbuk.com
- Facts
- A widow claimed a pension on the ground that her husband's death was due to a war injury. The Minister refused. Denning J, sitting to hear the appeal, had to explain both the criminal and the civil standards.
- Issue
- What do 'beyond reasonable doubt' and 'the balance of probabilities' mean in practice?
- Held
- The claim succeeded. The civil standard was the one that applied to it. Denning J's explanation of both standards is the part that matters.
- Principle
- is a high probability, short of certainty. It is not a shadow of a doubt. The is 'more probable than not'. Equal probabilities mean the burden is not discharged.
- Why it matters
- It compares the two standards. The case itself is a civil pension appeal, not a criminal trial.
Words and Latin in this note
- Balance of probabilities
- The standard of proof in civil cases, and the standard when an accused bears a legal burden: the court asks whether something is more likely than not to have happened. Open the note.
- Beyond reasonable doubt
- The high standard of proof in criminal cases: the prosecution must prove guilt so that the tribunal is sure. It is short of certainty, and it is not a mere shadow of a doubt. Open the note.
For study only. By lanbuk.com. Always check current sources and consult a qualified professional.