Call our lawyers
now
or,
have our lawyers
call you
What Does “Balance of Probabilities” Mean?
Updated on Nov 25, 2022 • 4 min read • 1036 views • Copy Link
What Does “Balance of Probabilities” Mean?
When courts decide whether a matter has been proven, they do so according to a benchmark which the party initiating the proceeding must reach. This is commonly referred to the standard of proof. All forums, including courts and tribunals, must apply the appropriate standard of proof when deciding if a matter has been proven. The overarching goal is the court being satisfied to the requisite degree of the matter being alleged. In civil matters, the decision maker must be satisfied that the matter has been proven on the balance of probabilities, while criminal matters require a higher standard of proof.
Legislative framework
The civil standard of proof is codified in Section 140 of the Evidence Act. The Act also provides a framework for the court to use in deciding whether the standard of proof has been satisfied on the balance of probabilities, namely:
- The nature of the cause of action or defence; and
- The nature of the subject matter of the proceedings; and
- The gravity of the matters alleged.
How to satisfy the court
Despite Section 140 of the Act, there is still a substantial amount of room for discretion in terms of how much weight a court will give to each consideration. As the Act stipulates, how the standard of proof of balance of probabilities is applied is highly contingent on the subject matter before the court. This essentially allows for a sliding scale to be implemented which works off the nature of the proceedings. The more serious the factual matter is, the higher the standard of proof that is required.
Case law on determining balance of probabilities
In addition to the legislation, case law is used to provide further clarification as to how one goes about satisfying the threshold of balance of probabilities. In the 2012 case of NOM v DPP, the Court of Appeal noted that:
“The standard of proof must be responsive to the gravity of the facts in issue and the consequences of the ultimate decision”
In the 1930 case of Briginshaw v Briginshaw, two very important considerations were established in order to assist the court and individuals in determining what surpasses or ultimately fails to reach this standard of proof, namely that a court or tribunal must be satisfied of the matters before it on the balance of probabilities:
- to a comfortable degree
- based on very clear and cogent evidence
It is this notion that guides the courts on how best to apply this threshold, however it should be noted that on numerous occasions courts have warned against a strict mathematical approach.
Holistic approach
What has to be proven on the balance of probabilities should not be viewed as simply a 1 vs 1 approach to the arguments put to the court. It should be a holistic approach. A court should not just simply weigh up the case of party A against the alternative case put forward by party B and come to a determination based on which case is more plausible.
It is imperative that sufficient evidence is provided to affirm the arguments made out to the court. The court must be satisfied that on the balance of probabilities, one case is more plausible than the other and that there is a foundation for the case which is backed up by the evidence before the court. Where there is a sufficient argument and sufficient foundation evidence, there is a greater likelihood that the threshold will be met.
In conclusion, the civil standard of proof of balance of probabilities can be interpreted in many ways by different courts and tribunals. In its simplest form, should the decision-maker deem that a version of events is 51% more likely to have occurred than the alternative version, then it meets the standard of proof of balance of probabilities. While balance of probabilities is a notion that is at face-value simple to understand, it can be complicated to establish whether the threshold has been met.
If you require legal advice or representation in a civil law matter or in any other legal matter, please contact Go To Court Lawyers.
Related Content
Right to Disconnect Laws Passed
Age Discrimination
The Serious Harm Test in Defamation Claims
Online Bullying Laws in Australia
Cultural Gift Program
What Can I Do If I Have Been Left Out Of A Will?
Performance Reviews
Working From Home
Religious and Cultural Leave
What if The Executor Is Dead or Missing?
What If You Can’t Find The Will?
Typos and Spelling Errors in Wills
Joseph Palamara
Managing Associate - Armstrong Legal
Joseph Palamara holds a Bachelor of Laws, a Graduate Diploma of Legal Practice and a Certificate in Legal Business from the College of Law. Joseph was admitted to practice law in the Supreme Court of Victoria and in the High Court of Australia. Joseph has worked in civil litigation, insolvency, debt recovery and consumer protection. He strives to provide the highest quality legal advice to clients, to ensure both a positive outcome and a positive experience.
Affordable Lawyers
Our Go To Court Lawyers will assist you in all areas of law. We specialise in providing legal advice urgently – at the time when you need it most. If you need a lawyer right now, today, we can help you – no matter where you are in Australia.How It Works
1. You speak directly to a lawyer
When you call the Go To Court Legal Hotline, you will be connected directly to a lawyer, every time.
2. Get your legal situation assessed
We determine the best way forward in your legal matter, free of charge. If you want to go ahead and book a face-to-face appointment, we will connect you with a specialist in your local area.
3. We arrange everything as needed
If you want to go ahead and book a fact-to-face appointment, we will connect you with a specialist in your local area no matter where you are and even at very short notice.
Related Law Topics
Northern Territory Civil and Administrative Tribunal
Northern Territory Civil and Administrative Tribunal The Northern Territory Civil and Administrative Tribunal (NTCAT) is a super tribunal for legal matters in the Northern Territory. NTCAT was established by the Northern Territory Civil and Administrative Tribunal Act 2014 to resolve minor legal disputes, as a venue to reconsider government administrative ....
Posted in:
Court Processes
Appeals Against Supreme Court Decisions (NSW)
The laws surrounding appeals against decisions of the Supreme Court of New South Wales are set out in the Uniform Civil Procedural Rules and the Supreme Court Act 1970. Appeals against Supreme Court decisions are heard by the Court of Appeal, which is the highest appeal court in New South Wales. This article summarises ....
Posted in:
Court Processes
Excessive Noise (NT) Neighbour disputes can arise from a variety of everyday issues. One common cause of complaints is excessive noise coming from the property next door. With a neighbour dispute, the first step is communication, with the parties trying to come to an agreement privately. However, there are other ....
Posted in:
Court Processes
Non-Parties in Child Protection Matters (Qld)
If a child whose safety and welfare you are concerned about is the subject of child protection proceedings, it is important to understand the legislative framework. If your grandchild, niece, nephew or another child you care about has been removed from their parents’ care, you may be called to give ....
Posted in:
Court Processes
Civil Trials in the Magistrates Court (WA)
Civil Trials in the Magistrates Court (WA) More than 95% of civil matters are resolved without proceeding to a civil trial. It is, however, important to be aware of the procedures involved in a civil trial so that you are prepared in the event your matter does not resolve and a trial ....
Posted in:
Court Processes
Adult guardianship in Queensland is handled by the Queensland Civil and Administrative Tribunal (QCAT). QCAT can appoint a person as an adult guardian in respect of a person aged over 18 who has impaired decision making. Guardians have the authority to assist in making certain decision for the person under ....
Posted in:
Court Processes
The 1959 High Court decision of Jones v Dunkel established an important principle of evidence law, which has become known as the Jones v Dunkel rule. The case concerned an action in negligence where the defendant failed to give evidence in circumstances where he could reasonably be expected to have ....
Posted in:
Court Processes
Administrative review occurs when a tribunal reviews a decision that has been made by a government department or agency. Administrative review can be done by tribunals or by courts and can occur at state, territory or federal level. In the ACT, the Civil and Administrative Tribunal (ACAT) and the Supreme Court are ....
Posted in:
Court Processes
Small Claims (ACT) In the ACT, small civil claims where the amount of money or property in dispute is less than $25,000 can be made in the ACT Civil and Administrative Tribunal (ACAT). These claims may be made with or without legal representation. This page deals with the processes involved ....
Posted in:
Court Processes
Costs Orders (NT) A costs order is an order that specifies who must pay the legal costs associated with a court proceeding. In the Northern Territory, costs orders are regulated by both legislation and court rules, including the Local Court Civil Procedure Act 1989 and the Supreme Court Rules 2008. This article deals ....
Posted in:
Court Processes
Adult Guardianship (WA) The Guardianship and Administration Act 1990 (WA) sets out the rules and procedures surrounding adult guardianship in Western Australia. Adult guardianship is necessary when a person is unable to make their own decisions about their lifestyle, medical treatment and legal affairs and requires another person to make ....
Posted in:
Court Processes
A long-established principle of the common law is “de minimis non curat lex”, which translates as ‘the law does not concern itself with trifles.’ The de minimis rule has application both in civil and in criminal jurisdictions. It effectively means that the law should not get involved in circumstances where ....
Posted in:
Court Processes