Jump to content

Adverse inference

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
(Redirected from Empty-Chair Doctrine)

Adverse inference is a legal inference, adverse to the concerned party, drawn from silence or absence of requested evidence. It is part of evidence codes based on common law in various countries.

According to Lawvibe, "the 'adverse inference' can be quite damning at trial. Essentially, when plaintiffs try to present evidence on a point essential to their case and can't because the document has been destroyed (by the defendant), the jury can infer that the evidence would have been adverse to (the defendant), and adopt the plaintiff’s reasonable interpretation of what the document would have said...."[1][better source needed]

In the United States

[edit]

Adverse inference applies in United States civil trials, but not criminal trials; criminal defendants are protected by the Fifth Amendment, which guarantees a right against self-incrimination (including self-incrimination by way of silence).[2]

In civil trials, adverse inference may be imposed as a sanction by the court in reaction to spoliation, such as willful destruction of relevant emails. In this case, the court may direct a jury to assume that the evidence that was destroyed was negative for the destroying party, i.e., that it was destroyed to hide something.[3] This applies not only to evidence destroyed but also to evidence existing but not produced by the party as well as to evidence under a party's control but not produced.[citation needed] See Notice to produce. The adverse inference is based upon the presumption that the party who controls the evidence would have produced it if it had been supportive to their case.

Adverse inference can also apply to a witness who is known to exist whom a party refuses to identify or produce. In such a case it is also known as the Missing-Witness Rule, or the Empty-Chair Doctrine.[4]

In English law

[edit]

After a change in the law in 1994, the right to silence under English law was amended because the court and jury were allowed to draw adverse inference from such a silence.[5] Under English law, the police, cautioning someone, say, "You do not have to say anything. But it may harm your defence if you do not mention, when questioned, something which you later rely on in court". Under English law, the court and the jury may draw an adverse inference from fact that someone did not mention a defence when given the chance to do so if charged with an offence.[5][6]

References

[edit]
  1. ^ "Virgin Gets Hammered by Adverse Inference". LawVibe.com. April 4, 2007. Archived from the original on November 17, 2007.
  2. ^ Johnson, William F. (4 November 2020). "Fifth Amendment Danger in Civil Cases". New York Law Journal. Retrieved 15 May 2024.
  3. ^ Nichols, Lauren R. (2010). "Spare the Rod, Spoil the Litigat e the Rod, Spoil the Litigator? The V or? The Varying Degr ying Degrees of Culpability Requir Culpability Required for an Adv ed for an Adverse Inf erse Inference Sanction Regar ence Sanction Regarding Spoliation of Electronic Discovery". Kentucky Law Journal. 99 (4). Retrieved 15 May 2024.
  4. ^ "Empty-Chair Doctrine Law and Legal Definition". US Legal. airSlate Legal Forms, Inc. Retrieved 2020-01-29.
  5. ^ a b Baksi, Catherine (24 May 2012), "Going "no comment": a delicate balancing act", Law Society Gazette, archived from the original on 13 January 2015, retrieved 13 January 2015
  6. ^ Adverse Inferences, Crown Prosecution Service, 26 September 2014