0
Of course. A prima facie case is one which is established by sufficient evidence to prove guilt and can be overthrown only by rebutting evidence produced by the other side.
Wiki User
∙ 12y ago
Add your answer:
Earn +20 pts
Which is better 'prima facie' or 'res ipsa loquitor' for inland disputes?
Res ipsa loquitur (the thing speaks for itself), a doctrine in tort law, can establish a prima facie (evidence that sustains a judgment in the absence of contradictory evidence) case. It is not clear what you are asking in your question about "inland disputes" (definition?).
Is plaintiff's testimony sufficient to establish a prima facie case?
In some cases yes
Why are people in Scotland so awesome?
Well there is no factual evidence that they are, however there seems to be a Prima facie case that they are deluded.
Is a prima facie evidence related only to procedural law?
Prima facie is a Latin term meaning "at first look," or "on its face," and refers to the evidence gathered before trial which is sufficient to prove the case unless substantial contradictory evidence is shown at trial.Actually the term is fairly commonly used in many endeavors outside the court and law. Someone describing something as "Prima Facie" usually means the matter is a "slam-dunk."
Difference between actual duties and prima facie duties?
Actual duties are specific tasks or responsibilities that an individual is expected to perform in a given situation, while prima facie duties are general moral principles that should be considered when making ethical decisions. Actual duties are context-specific, while prima facie duties serve as guidelines for determining moral obligations.
What has the author Sebastian Smedile written?
Sebastian Smedile has written: 'Essential elements to a prima facie case' -- subject(s): Evidence (Law)
What is the so-called Prima Face Case?
Prima facie means "on its face" or "at first face/appearance" and may refer to a type of action that meets an element of a crime without the other party being able to offer rebuttal. Alternatively, it may be used to refer to the set of elements that must be proven in order to hold someone liable for a crime, e.g. to make out a prima facie case of negligence you must prove four elements.
If a case is established as being prima facie is it invariably brought before a court and if not why not?
No, if the defending party does not plead an affirmative defense or cannot produce contradictory evidence the case may be won on summary judgment without going to trial. Likely however a case will go to trial if the party has presented prima facie evidence that the crime or tort has been committed. Added: "Prima facie is a Latin phrase meaning "at first look," or, in plain English, "on the face of it," and refers to evidence available before trial that is sufficient to prove the case, unless there is substantial evidence to the contrary that can be produced at trial. Although the case may not actually go to court a prima facie case must still be presented to a Grand Jury by the prosecution in order to get an indictment. Even if the evidence against them is overwhelming, and even if they want to "cop a plea," the defendant must still be indicted of the crime first.
A cause of action that's good enough to require rebuttal and to submit the case to trial is what?
A cause of action that requires rebuttal and trial typically involves a claim where the plaintiff has provided enough evidence to support their allegations, creating a genuine issue of material fact that needs to be resolved by the court. This typically involves situations where the defendant's actions or negligence have caused harm or damages to the plaintiff, leading to a disputed legal issue that must be adjudicated through the trial process.
In trying to make a prima facie case are documents regarding a business arrangement sufficient evidence to prove to Court that the arrangement was intentionally misrepresented by family lawyer?
If the documents include, for example, a letter from the lawyer that describes the arrangement differently from the arrangement itself, then perhaps, although intent is generally proven from all of the facts and circumstances. The family lawyer can seek to rebut your prima facie case with evidence of no mal intent, such as his / her sworn testimony, correspondence, etc.
Is it tort negligence if someone drives under influence of pain medicine and they cause and accident?
Without knowing all the details, it is impossible to be certain, but this would probably satisfy a prima facie case for negligence.
Is a prosecutor legally permitted to engage plea negotiations absent prima facie evidence?
What do you mean by prima facie evidence? A prosecutor is free to enter into a plea agreement at any point during a criminal case. He or she is also ethically required not to charge a case against an individual unless they feel that they can prove that case beyond a reasonable doubt to begin with. That's not to say that there isn't such a thing as a unethical prosecutor that would charge a case on very little evidence. However that is a rarity. A prosecutor ethically is also required not to prosecute a case unless they believe that person to be guilty it is not simply to secure convictions. There is no such thing as an amount of evidence that is required for a plea negotiation. However, if a prosecutor is being ethical about it there will almost always be some evidence to suggest the accussed's guilt.
