TITLE

Proof

PUB. DATE
December 2005
SOURCE
FastForward;Dec2005, Vol. 10 Issue 6, p16
SOURCE TYPE
Periodical
DOC. TYPE
Article
ABSTRACT
The article discusses factors to be considered by Canadian athletes about proof, one of the issues being raised during dispute. Proof is defined as the establishment or refutation of an alleged fact by evidence. It is also the evidence that determines the judgment of a court. In the event of dispute, athletes should find out which party has the burden of proof.
ACCESSION #
20872604

 

Related Articles

  • Noticeboard.  // International Journal of Evidence & Proof;Sep2007, Vol. 11 Issue 3, p221 

    The article presents facts and issues about various court cases from all over the world. From New Zealand, one case involves reverse-onus burden of proof. A court case from Canada focuses on post-hypnosis evidence while court cases from Canada, Australia and New Zealand focus on legislative fact...

  • DISCOVERY: Not a Job for Christopher Columbus. Glenn, Donald A. // Family Advocate;Spring2009, Vol. 31 Issue 4, p8 

    The article presents the author's comment on the role of discovery in a divorce case. According to the author, discovery is the most time-intensive and expensive phase of a family law case. The author feels that effective discovery most frequently occurred when he worked with his regular...

  • ASSET FORFEITURE, BURDENS OF PROOF AND THE WAR ON DRUGS. Stahl, Marc B. // Journal of Criminal Law & Criminology;Summer1992, Vol. 83 Issue 2, p274 

    This article argues that the placement of the burden of proof by Section 881 of the Comprehensive Drug Abuse Prevention and Control Act of 1970 in the U.S. violates the Due Process Clause. The Act's statutory requirements for affecting a forfeiture was also analyzed in the article. Section 881...

  • Conviction Without Conviction. Fisher, Talia // Minnesota Law Review;2012, Vol. 96 Issue 3, p833 

    On the normative plane, this Article raises some of the principal arguments in favor of a linear conceptualization of criminal conviction and point to the utilitarian, expressive, retributivist, and political legitimacy bases for probabilistic sentencing. This Article shows that a sliding scale...

  • A TROUT IN THE MILK: SUBTLY RAISING THE BURDEN OF PROOF IN A WRONGFUL DEATH CASE. Roper, Joseph J. // Defense Counsel Journal;Oct2007, Vol. 74 Issue 4, p382 

    The article examines the potential ways to subtly raise the burden of proof in wrongful death cases through use of a case study involving a death from exposure to carbon monoxide. The woman in this case died because of massive exposure to carbon monoxide, which came from the tank supplying her...

  • Burdens of Proof in Retaliatory Adverse Action Cases Under Title VII. Drachsler, David A. // Labor Law Journal;Jan84, Vol. 35 Issue 1, p28 

    The article discusses the U.S. Supreme Court's prescription for allocation of burdens of production and burdens of proof in the case "Texas Department of Community Affairs v. Burdine." This uncritical use of Burdine artificially narrows the focus of the courts' inquiry to whether the plaintiff...

  • Price Waterhouse v. Hopkins: Mixed Motive Discrimination Cases, the Shifting Burden of Proof, and Sexual Stereotyping. Cohen, Cynthia F. // Labor Law Journal;Nov89, Vol. 40 Issue 11, p723 

    The article discusses the U.S. Supreme Court's decision on the "Price Waterhouse v. Hopkins" employment discrimination case. One of the most significant issues addressed by the Supreme Court in the case is the burden of proof in the mixed-motive discrimination. A mixed motive case involves...

  • Information Asymmetries and Regulatory Decision Costs: An Analysis of U.S. Electric Utility Rate Changes 1980�2000. Fremeth, Adam R.; Holburn, Guy L. F. // Journal of Law, Economics & Organization;Jan2012, Vol. 28 Issue 1, p127 

    We argue that information asymmetries between regulators and firms increase the administrative decision costs of initiating new policies due to the costs of satisfying evidentiary or �burden of proof� requirements. We further contend that regulators with better information about...

  • MAINTAINING THE CLEAR AND CONVINCING EVIDENCE STANDARD FOR PATENT INVALIDITY CHALLENGES IN Microsoft Corp. v. i4i Limited Partnership, 131 S. CT. 2238 (2011). Oberman, Irina // Harvard Journal of Law & Public Policy;Winter2012, Vol. 35 Issue 1, p439 

    No abstract available.

Share

Read the Article

Courtesy of VIRGINIA BEACH PUBLIC LIBRARY AND SYSTEM

Sorry, but this item is not currently available from your library.

Try another library?
Sign out of this library

Other Topics