Discussing UK law. Links: swarb.co.uk | law-index | Acts | Members Image galleries

appeal - error of fact

appeal - error of fact

Postby megaman » Sun May 14, 2017 2:46 am

My understanding is that to appeal on the grounds of an error of fact the error has to be one that no rational judge could come to.

is this correct?

if NO
then what is the law?

if YES
then what exactly amounts of no a sufficient absurdity?
- Does there have to be ZERO evidence which supports the judges finding of fact?
- What if there is one piece of evidence supporting the judges finding of fact and 20 pieces of evidence in support of a different fact and 20 pieces of evidence which show that the one piece of evidence which supported the judges finding of fact is wrong.
- What if the evidence does not directly say the thing the judge has found to be fact and the judge merely claims to infer the fact from it, how does one determine that the judges finding is irrational?
megaman
 
Posts: 156
Joined: Mon Oct 28, 2013 8:55 pm

Re: appeal - error of fact

Postby Hairyloon » Sun May 14, 2017 8:30 am

Pretty much correct, yes. I think the rule is "reasonable", not "rational".
The problem with evidence is that is often open to interpretation, the rule, as far as I remember is that they can dismiss the evidence, but they cannot ignore it altogether.
I forget what case that comes from, sorry, but if that is your case then you need to make it clear and find the reference.

In any case, you are up against the problem that judges tend to be bias in favour of judges: they will assume that you are disgruntled because you lost, and that the evidence could have been interpreted in the way the judge interpreted it.

My personal experience was that the judge ruled that the respondent did not have information that was contained in a document that the respondent had supplied to the court. I never did quite get to the bottom of how they managed to get away with that. :?
Take me to your lizard...
User avatar
Hairyloon
 
Posts: 9924
Joined: Thu Nov 01, 2012 3:12 pm
Location: From there to here and here to there... Funny things are everywhere.

Re: appeal - error of fact

Postby atticus » Sun May 14, 2017 9:24 am

The very simple point is that trial judges make findings of fact after hearing all the evidence presented to them. Appeal courts generally review the application of the law to those findings of fact. They frequently say that the trial judge is best placed to make the factual rulings.

I am sure dls can post a link to a case or two on when an appeal court will interfere with the findings of fact by the trial judge.
User avatar
atticus
 
Posts: 19540
Joined: Sun Nov 11, 2012 2:27 pm
Location: E&W

Re: appeal - error of fact

Postby dls » Sun May 14, 2017 9:48 am

Appeals take place under many different structures, and you must be careful with generalisations. There will be varieties of restrictions - but the general theme is usually the same.

Nor can you safely set out with the sort of mathematical balances imagined. They do not exist. Different pieces of evidence can have hugely varying weights.

In addition to what Atti says, a point often referred to is the assessment of witness who have given evidence. A court of appeal can read the evidence which was given, but where credibility is at stake, they cannot see the demeanour of witnesses.
David Swarbrick (Admin) dswarb@gmail.com - 0795 457 9992
User avatar
dls
Site Admin
 
Posts: 12135
Joined: Thu Nov 01, 2012 1:35 pm
Location: Brighouse, West Yorkshire

Re: appeal - error of fact

Postby megaman » Sun May 14, 2017 3:11 pm

dls wrote:Appeals take place under many different structures, and you must be careful with generalisations. There will be varieties of restrictions - but the general theme is usually the same.

Nor can you safely set out with the sort of mathematical balances imagined. They do not exist. Different pieces of evidence can have hugely varying weights.

In addition to what Atti says, a point often referred to is the assessment of witness who have given evidence. A court of appeal can read the evidence which was given, but where credibility is at stake, they cannot see the demeanour of witnesses.


But they do not need to see the demeanor of the witness because you absolutly cannot tell the accuracy or truth of what someone is saying by his demenour.
The appeal court will know the content of what was said and the circumstances under which the witness witnessed what he claims to have witnessed - everything they actually need!
megaman
 
Posts: 156
Joined: Mon Oct 28, 2013 8:55 pm

Re: appeal - error of fact

Postby atticus » Sun May 14, 2017 5:14 pm

But, meg, that is not how appeals courts generally work.

Appeals are usually not retrials. Appeals are usually restricted to points of law.

See above.
User avatar
atticus
 
Posts: 19540
Joined: Sun Nov 11, 2012 2:27 pm
Location: E&W

Re: appeal - error of fact

Postby dls » Sun May 14, 2017 6:07 pm

But they do not need to see the demeanor of the witness because you absolutly cannot tell the accuracy or truth of what someone is saying by his demenour.


Yes, that is your belief, but that belief is not universally (or perhaps even widely) shared. We are not talking just about silly things such as whether someone's eyes are too close together.

In any event, you asked about how in fact courts work, not at all about your particular views on how they should work.
David Swarbrick (Admin) dswarb@gmail.com - 0795 457 9992
User avatar
dls
Site Admin
 
Posts: 12135
Joined: Thu Nov 01, 2012 1:35 pm
Location: Brighouse, West Yorkshire

Re: appeal - error of fact

Postby megaman » Sun May 14, 2017 8:00 pm

dls wrote:
But they do not need to see the demeanor of the witness because you absolutly cannot tell the accuracy or truth of what someone is saying by his demenour.


Yes, that is your belief, but that belief is not universally (or perhaps even widely) shared. We are not talking just about silly things such as whether someone's eyes are too close together.

In any event, you asked about how in fact courts work, not at all about your particular views on how they should work.


In a previous post i provided peer-reviewed evidence that your demenour is an unreliable way of judging someone!
this is of course getting off topic now so i shall say no more on that point
megaman
 
Posts: 156
Joined: Mon Oct 28, 2013 8:55 pm

Re: appeal - error of fact

Postby atticus » Sun May 14, 2017 8:03 pm

Yes, but at the moment how you would like things to be and how they are differ, meg

Something for you to read
User avatar
atticus
 
Posts: 19540
Joined: Sun Nov 11, 2012 2:27 pm
Location: E&W


Return to Other Law

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest

cron