When Power Goes Wrong · Evidence & Proof Ledger · Part 26

What standard of proof applies in a civil public-law claim?

Civil claims are generally proved on the balance of probabilities. Serious allegations such as fraud, dishonesty or deliberate abuse do not create a third standard, but they ordinarily require evidence sufficiently cogent to satisfy the civil standard.

The starting point is the ordinary civil standard: the claimant must prove the relevant facts on the balance of probabilities.

In Z v Dental Complaints Assessment Committee [2008] NZSC 55, the Supreme Court confirmed that New Zealand law recognises the civil and criminal standards, not an intermediate third standard. Serious allegations remain civil questions where the proceeding is civil, but the evidential quality needed to persuade the court naturally reflects the gravity and inherent probability of what is alleged.

Allegation strength does not replace proof.Calling conduct “fraud”, “corruption”, “bad faith” or “misfeasance” does not lower the evidential burden. Each pleaded element must be established from admissible evidence.

Civil standardBalance of probabilities.

Serious allegationsStill the civil standard, applied with appropriate regard to the seriousness and cogency of the evidence.

Practical consequenceThe pleading should identify exactly which facts prove each element rather than relying on labels.

Proof mapElement → fact → source → admissibility → inference → conclusion.

Before gathering more documents, ask: what proposition must this document actually prove?

Supreme CourtZ v Dental Complaints Assessment Committee [2008] NZSC 55.

← Series index · Previous · Next →