The Practice Note provides practical guidance on the evidence to be used in countervailing investigations. It covers the procedural requirements that an investigating authority must adhere to in requesting evidence, the rights of interested parties to provide the evidence and the right to defend their interests with the submission of evidence. It also addresses the obligation to protect information as confidential if it is claimed as such, the need to verify information that has been submitted and in which circumstances investigating authorities may rely in other facts to make a determination. Initiation of investigation Prior to imposing countervailing measures, the Agreement on Subsidies and Countervailing Measures (SCM Agreement) requires Member States to conduct an investigation. The investigation is initiated after a complaint or application has been received. In special circumstance a Member State can initiate an investigation without having received a complaint or an application. However the Member State may only initiate if it has sufficient evidence of the existence of a subsidy, injury and the causal link between the subsidy and injury. For practical guidance

This Practice Note examines the issues to be considered in relation to medical evidence in disability discrimination claims in the employment tribunal, ie prohibited conduct claims under Equality Act 2010 (EqA 2010). It explains that the decision as to disability rests with the employment tribunal, not the medical expert. The Practice Note explains whether the tribunal can consider factors other than medical evidence, what medical evidence will typically cover, the onus on the claimant to produce medical evidence, whether the tribunal can reject medical evidence, and how evidence from GPs regarding depressive conditions should be approached. It goes on to note that evidence should typically be from a single, jointly-instructed, medical expert and explains the principles that the tribunal should apply where a party wishes to have an additional expert of their own. The expenses of obtaining a medical report are noted as well as issues that may arise under the Access to Medical Reports Act 1988 (AMRA 1988) and Assimilated Regulation (EU) 2016/679, UK General Data Protection Regulation (UK GDPR). Medical evidence obviously plays

This Practice Note considers the use of the International Bar Association (IBA) Rules on the Taking of Evidence in International Arbitration (the IBA Rules) in international arbitration. The IBA Rules are routinely adopted, in whole or in part, in international arbitration (commercial and investment) to manage factual and expert evidence, in particular where parties are from different legal cultures, typically common law and civil law. The IBA Rules contain a mixture of provisions, some closer to common law systems (eg on the taking of witness evidence) and some closer to civil law systems (eg on document production requests). Other areas offer a compromise between the two approaches. The IBA Rules are supplemented by detailed commentary published by the IBA, which provides useful additional information for practitioners, and which is referred to in this Practice Note. The current version of the IBA Rules was adopted by resolution of the IBA Council on 17 December 2020. Where parties have agreed to apply the IBA Rules (in whole

This Practice Note provides guidance on evidence in private law children proceedings including admissibility, credibility, competence and compellability. It also details the provisions relating to evidence by children together with provisions in relation to investigative interviews, hearsay, disclosure and public interest immunity, and disclosure of previous criminal convictions. On 21 November 2017, the Ministry of Justice issued guidance on a police investigation into the potential manipulation of forensic toxicology test results at Trimega Laboratories Limited, regarding hair strand testing for drug and alcohol use was undertaken between 2010 and April 2014. Form C650 should be used for an application to vary or set aside a children order based on drug or toxicology testing. No court fee is payable for applications issued in Form C650. See News analysis: Unreliable forensic toxicology tests—next steps. Forms of evidence There are three forms of evidence: • oral evidence by witnesses—note that the court may allow a witness to give evidence through a video link or by other means • documentary evidence such as witness statements, reports, photographs and case records

The purpose of this Practice Note is to summarise the rules in Court of Protection (CoP) proceedings relating to witness evidence and expert evidence. Reference will be made throughout to Parts 14 and 15 of the Court of Protection Rules 2017 (COPR 2017) and to Practice Direction 14A: Written evidence (PD 14A) and Practice Direction 15A: Expert evidence (PD 15A) to the COPR. Witness evidence COPR 2017, r 14.3(1) sets out the general rule that any fact which needs to be proved by evidence of a witness is to be proved: • where there is a final hearing, by the witness’s oral evidence, or • at any other hearing, or if there is no hearing, by the witness’s evidence in writing Where a witness is called to give oral evidence at a final hearing, their witness statement shall stand as their evidence in chief unless the court directs otherwise. Where the court considers there to be good reason not to confine the evidence of the witness to the contents of the witness statement, it may

As a general rule, hearsay is not admissible evidence in Scottish criminal trials (see, for example: Introduction: Stair Memorial Encyclopaedia [237]). There are, however, a number of exceptions to that general rule. The first and most basic exception allowed in Scots Law is that evidence of hearsay may be led to show that the statement was made (primary hearsay). Such evidence, however, will not be admissible for the truth of the contents of the statement (secondary hearsay). For further information, see: Introduction: Stair Memorial Encyclopaedia [237]. This means that it is permissible to lead evidence to prove that something was said, which may go to prove state of knowledge or to explain subsequent actions, but the evidence cannot prove that the thing said was true and accurate in its contents. This Practice Note is concerned with the other principal exception to the hearsay rule: statements of the accused, which are generally always admissible despite being hearsay. Witness statements As a general rule, statements made by a person whilst giving evidence

The Government has announced reforms intended to address the impact of rape myths in sexual offence trials and improve the treatment of complainants. The Government says the change will make trials fairer for victims. The measures will impose tighter limits on admitting evidence of a complainant’s previous sexual history, previous allegations of sexual violence, and previous compensation claims, with the aim of reducing distress and preventing irrelevant or prejudicial material from being used against victims. The announcement draws on recommendations made by the Law Commission in its Evidence in sexual offences prosecutions final report (July 2025).

Who to serve and when The respondent to the application will be the Official Receiver or office-holder and therefore the application and witness statement must be served on them. Pursuant to the Insolvency (England and Wales) Rules 2016 (IR 2016), SI 2016/1024, r 22.2 notice of an application for permission to use a prohibited name must be given by the applicant to the Secretary of State for Business and Trade (the Secretary of State). This can be done via the Insolvency Service (for postal and email address details, see Insolvency Service Guidance: Re-use of company names). IR 2016, SI 2016/1024, r 22.2 requires at least 14 days’ notice to be given to the Secretary of State. However, in practice, notice should be given to all interested parties as far in advance of any hearing as possible, to give the Insolvency Service time to consider the application with their lawyers. If the Insolvency Service has concerns about

This Practice Note considers specific evidential requirements supporting an application which is to be determined without a hearing. Evidence requirements This table contains links to precedent witness statements for the topics listed. Topic Practice Notes Precedents and comments Challenging jurisdiction Challenging court jurisdiction—general principlesChallenging court jurisdiction—has a party submitted to a jurisdiction?Challenging court jurisdiction—application under CPR 11 (timing and extensions of time)Challenging court jurisdiction—application under CPR 11 (general considerations)Anti-suit injunctions—making an application Witness statement in support of an application to challenge English court jurisdictionWitness statement opposing an application to challenge English court jurisdictionWitness statement in support of an anti-suit injunction Staying proceedings Pending arbitration Witness statement supporting application to stay court proceedings pending arbitration ACF Vols 6(2) Arbitration [439]Witness statement opposing application to stay court proceedings pending arbitration ACF Vols 6(2) Arbitration [440] Interim injunction Interim and final injunctions—overview Witness statement in support of an application for a prohibitory interim injunctionWitness statement opposing an application for a prohibitory interim injunction Challenging default judgment Default

ARCHIVED: This Practice Note has been archived and is not maintained. Evidence-based policy can be defined as a practice and approach that helps people make well informed decisions about policies, programmes and projects by ensuring that policy development and its implementation is informed by the best available evidence. A Whitehall policymaker describes what this means in practice: ‘Evidence-based policy, to me, is two sides. One is the evidence of the need to do something and the other side is the evidence of this being the appropriate solution.’ What Works? Evidence-based Policy and Practice in Public Services, Nutley and Smith 2000. The rise of evidence-based policy ‘We must produce policies that really deal with problems, that are forward-looking and shaped by evidence rather than a response to short-term pressures; that tackle causes not symptoms’ White Paper—Modernising Government, March 1999. The UK has been, and remains, among the world-leaders on evidence-based and evidence-informed policy within the UK. In 1997, the New Labour government had an explicit goal of putting an end to ideological

This Practice Note provides guidance on proving factual matters including the status of witness statements. The position on the use of factual evidence in subsequent proceedings is considered, as well as the admissibility of other tribunals’ factual findings. Witness immunity from suit is also considered. Burden of proof Under English law, where a party asserts a particular fact which is not self-evident, it has to prove it (Robins v National Trust as cited in Ball v Ball). It has been recognised by the courts that the type of factual allegation will have a bearing on the evidence required to prove it, namely ‘the more serious, or the less likely, an allegation of fact appears to be, so the evidence in support of it will require to be correspondingly more cogent and persuasive’ (Ma v St George's Healthcare NHS Trust at para [11], cited in Serafin v Malkiewicz at para [87]). The form of proof does not have to be a witness statement provided by

The burden of establishing that there is sufficient evidence to raise a particular issue.