Скачать или смотреть Judicial Gatekeepers: How Australian Judges Control Juries on Evidence Sufficiency

Join LawCast AU for an insightful exploration of judicial oversight in jury trials, focusing on when judges withdraw issues due to insufficient evidence. This episode breaks down the mechanisms judges use to ensure only viable cases reach juries, including rulings on no case to answer submissions that can lead to directed verdicts or case dismissals.

Discover the historical evolution from requiring just a scintilla of evidence to today's standard, where judges assess if evidence could reasonably satisfy a jury. In civil cases, practices vary by state: Victoria and South Australia offer discretion on whether defendants must elect not to call evidence before submissions, while New South Wales mandates no further evidence without leave if submissions fail. Queensland distinguishes between lack of evidence and weak evidence, requiring election for the latter. Tasmania and the Federal Court emphasize case-specific factors, balancing efficiency and fairness.

Learn how judges might defer rulings until after jury verdicts to avoid retrials on appeal, and the implications for both civil and criminal proceedings. This analysis highlights the delicate balance between judicial authority and jury fact-finding, essential for understanding Australian courtroom dynamics. Ideal for legal students, practitioners, and anyone interested in the intricacies of justice.