Arguments

 

Defendant's argument:

"The defendant accepts that, in the absence of any direct evidence of a defendant's negligence, a court is entitled to draw inferences from the known circumstantial facts. But, if there are many explanations that are consistent with the known facts, then it cannot be reasonably inferred that the unidentified driver was necessarily negligent.

To draw such an inference, it is necessary to show that it is more probable than not that the driver was negligent. But this means being able to exclude other equally likely inferences which do not involve negligence on the part of the unidentified driver. In the present case it is not possible to exclude such other possibilities."

Do you agree?

Click here for feedback