Burden of proving allegations, The balance of probability standart explained

from RE A (CONTACT RISK OF VIOLENCE) [2005] EWHC 851 (findind of facts - JUSTICE BLACK)

[30]  The mother’s allegations are serious ones. I remind myself that the burden of proving them rests firmly upon her and that the standard of proof is

[2006] 1 FLR 293

the balance of probability, about which Lord Nicholls of Birkenhead said this in Re H and Others (Minors) (Sexual Abuse: Standard of Proof) [1996] AC 563, [1996] 1 FLR 80 at 586 and 96 respectively: ‘The balance of probability standard means that a court is satisfied an event occurred if the court considers that, on the evidence, the occurrence of the event was more likely than not. When assessing the probabilities the court will have in mind as a factor, to whatever extent is appropriate in the particular case, that the more serious the allegation the less likely it is that the event occurred and, hence, the stronger should be the evidence before the court concludes that the allegation is established on the balance of probability. Fraud is usually less likely than negligence. Deliberate physical injury is usually less likely than accidental physical injury. A stepfather is usually less likely to have repeatedly raped and had non-consensual oral sex with his under-age stepdaughter than on some occasion to have lost his temper and slapped her. Built into the preponderance of probability standard is a serious degree of flexibility in respect of the seriousness of the allegation.

Although the result is much the same, this does not mean that  where a serious allegation is in issue the standard of proof required is higher. It means only that the inherent probability or improbability of an event is itself a matter to be taken into account when weighing the probabilities and deciding whether, on balance, the event occurred. The more improbable the event, the stronger must be the evidence that it did occur before, on the balance of probability, its occurrence will be established.’

[31]  The assessment of the strength of the evidence involves an evaluation of the evidence of the witnesses, written and oral, and scrutiny of the documentation as well as a consideration of the degree to which known facts provide a guide as to where the truth lies.