Meaning of Refraining from Presenting Evidence

The rule is that “he has no judge but what his eyes see.
” The parties in court prove the correctness of their word through evidence.
The attorneys representing the parties in court invest considerable time in these decisions presenting evidence in court.
It is not the role of the court to bring evidence that a party did not take care to bring.
The evidence must touch on the controversial questions that are there to clarify facts that are disputed.

The plaintiff is not obligated to bring the best evidence that can be obtained, i.e.: the maximum evidence, and it is sufficient if he brings sufficient evidence to prove his case.
And it does not matter if he had the opportunity to obtain ‘better’ evidence.
Failure to present better evidence, if it were necessary, does not constitute an evidentiary weight of the victim’s duty to bear the burden of persuasion, but only a risk that less good evidence will not suffice to lift the burden.

Sometimes, the court will give weight to the fact that a party chose not to bring evidence of one kind or another, where it is known that he had the opportunity to bring evidence and chose not to do so.
The way a litigant conducts his case in court has evidential significance, similar to circumstantial evidence, and evidentiary significance may be given for non-submission of evidence.

Such conduct, in the absence of a credible and plausible explanation, works for the duty of the adopter, since it establishes a strong fact that, based on reason and life experience, the law of avoidance lawfully admits that if the same evidence was brought, it would act to avoid and support the adversary’s version.
Suppose a tenant has made a self-repair of a leak that has not been repaired by the landlord, and that tenant has refrained from bringing as a witness to court the plumber who performed the work. In this way evidentiary weight is actually given to evidence that has not been presented.

In such a matter, a rule was taken by the courts, which place a party in his custody who will not prevent the court from having evidence in his favor, and if he refrains from doing so and there is no plausible explanation, it can be concluded that the evidence presented would have acted against him.
This rule is accepted and ingrained in both civil and criminal law, and the more significant the evidence, the more decisive and extreme the court may draw from its presentation against those who refrained from presenting it.

The evidential weight of refraining from bringing evidence is examined to the extent to which incriminating conduct is examined.
On both the civil and criminal levels, this avoidance strengthens the evidence for the abstainer and weakens the evidence presented on his behalf to prove his version.
In this way, evidentiary weight is actually given to evidence that has not been presented.

It can be concluded that a party who refrained from bringing evidence in his favor which was within his reach and did not give a reasonable explanation, that if the evidence had been brought it would have acted against him and therefore, he refrained from bringing the evidence.

0 +
Apartments in Israel
0 nis
Average price for a 4 room apartment in Tel Aviv
0 %
Rise in the price index of input in residential construction from the year 1956 to 2021
Scroll to top