David Mason revisits the civil standard of proof
In Life Sentences Review Commissioners v D [2008] UKHL 33, [2008] All ER (D) 119 (Jun), the House of Lords has again explained the controversial issue of the standard of proof required in cases where the criminal standard does not apply. The standard of proof in criminal cases has historically been that the case should be proved so that the jury was sure of guilt. The civil standard has been traditionally that the case must be proved on a balance of probabilities, that is that the fact to be proved is more likely than not. Until the case of Re H (Minors) Sexual Abuse: Standard of Proof [1996] 1 All ER 1 was decided by the House of Lords, the existence of a mysterious third standard was speculated upon, but not defined.
Re H concerned the standard of proof required in child care cases. The consequences for parents and children of findings of sexual abuse are serious. How parents are to be protected against the consequences of false allegations and how children can be protected
