Criminal vs Civil Litigation in Canada
Learning about and sharing my very basic understanding of the Canadian legal system. This is not legal advise. I am not a lawyer. I am not even a theologian. This is just part of my 'independent publication'.
Information sourced from Pax Law Corporation
Criminal litigation in Canada involves the prosecution of individuals or entities accused of committing acts that are considered offenses against society. These offenses are codified in statutes such as the Criminal Code of Canada, and the state, represented by the Crown, takes on the role of the prosecutor. The primary aim of criminal litigation is to maintain public order and safety by punishing and deterring unlawful behavior.
In contrast, civil litigation deals with disputes between individuals, organizations, or a combination thereof, where one party seeks compensation or another form of legal remedy from the other. Civil cases can encompass a wide range of issues, including contract disputes, personal injury claims, and family law matters. Unlike criminal litigation, civil cases are typically initiated by the aggrieved party, known as the plaintiff, rather than the state.
Criminal vs Civil: Proving the case
In criminal litigation the guilt of the defendant must be proven 'beyond a reasonable doubt', whereas in civil litigation the case of the plaintiff rests on a 'balance of probabilities'.
The legal standards applied in criminal and civil cases are fundamentally different, leading to varying approaches in how cases are argued and adjudicated. In criminal litigation, the legal standard of “beyond a reasonable doubt” requires that the evidence presented by the prosecution must leave the judge or jury with a firm conviction of the defendant’s guilt. This standard is stringent, recognizing the severe consequences of criminal convictions, such as imprisonment or fines.
Conversely, civil litigation operates under the legal standard of the “balance of probabilities.” This means that the plaintiff must show that their claims are more likely true than not, which is a much lower threshold than in criminal cases. The rationale behind this standard is that civil cases typically involve disputes over rights and obligations rather than issues of liberty, thus requiring less rigorous proof.
Criminal v. Civil: How the Criminal Process Can Impact a Parallel Civil Process - Lerners
(This article was published in “For the Defence”, Criminal Lawyers Association Newsletter, Vol. 38, No. 2 - July 2017, 18-24)The wrong that constitutes a sexual offence is invariably also actionable before the civil courts.
