The plaintiff - their legal representative outlines the case for the prosecution. It's then up to the defence barrister to answer the allegations on behalf of the defendant.
A legal defense that prevents a plaintiff from recovering damages is known as an "affirmative defense." This can include defenses such as contributory negligence, where the plaintiff's own actions contributed to their injury, or assumption of risk, where the plaintiff accepted the risks associated with a risky activity. If successfully argued, these defenses can bar or reduce the plaintiff's ability to recover damages in a lawsuit.
Your question is too broad to be answered as written, as the nature of the defense depends upon the cause of action asserted by the Plaintiff.
The defense of consent can provide justification of a tort if the defendant can show that the plaintiff agreed to the conduct that caused the harm. This defense asserts that the plaintiff willingly accepted the risk associated with the defendant's actions.
An affirmative defense is when the defendant presents new evidence to counter the plaintiff's claims, while a defense in legal proceedings is a general denial or rebuttal of the plaintiff's claims without presenting new evidence.
Plaintiff is the party who starts a lawsuit.
The preferred defense in a negligence suit is to argue that the defendant did not owe a duty of care to the plaintiff, did not breach that duty, or that the plaintiff's own actions contributed to their injury (contributory negligence or assumption of risk). Additionally, the defendant may argue that the plaintiff's injury was not directly caused by their actions.
It generally means the access by a plaintiff to a lawyer who directs his defense.
An affirmative defense is a response to a legal claim where the defendant admits the facts alleged by the plaintiff but offers a justification or excuse for their actions. A counterclaim, on the other hand, is a separate claim made by the defendant against the plaintiff, alleging that the plaintiff has caused harm or injury to the defendant.
In a civil case, the plaintiff is the party who starts the proceedings by filing a complaint against the defendant.
A denial does just that it denies the Plaintiff's allegations and the burden of proof is still on the Plaintiff to prove the prima facie case.An affirmative defense does not deny the allegations but asserts a defense that would negate the legal effect of the Plaintiff's cause of action. The burden of proof in an affirmative defense is on the Defendant.An example would be a breach of contract case. The Plaintiff claims that he had a contract with the Defendant, and Defendant did not perform the contract. A denial would say "We never had a contract" and the Plaintiff would have to prove the existence of a contract. An affirmative defense would say "Yes, we had a contract, but that was 20 years ago thus the action is barred by the 10 year statute of limitations." Then the burden of proof is on the Defendant to show that the contract falls outside of the statute of limitations period.
In order to successfully assert the assumption of risk defense, two key elements are required: (1) the plaintiff must have knowledge of the specific risk involved, and (2) the plaintiff must voluntarily choose to accept that risk.
The sides in a civil trial are the same as a criminal trial. There is a plaintiff and a defendant. In a criminal trial the plaintiff is usually the jurisdictioni charging the defendant.