Workshop on Burden of Proof

The following issues were discussed:

Should the prima facie rule be redesigned in such a way that it would no longer constitute an obstacle to victims and their representatives bringing cases to court.
Countries outside the EU, such as Australia, have traditionally looked at EU practice but are there valid models or alternatives for the EU to get its own inspiration from?

Proof and evidence are crucial in anti-discrimination cases but the position of victims needs to be improved to make anti-discrimination law work in practice. The workshop heavily discussed the usefulness of the shift of burden of proof as established by EU law. The rule frequently interferes with procedural rules on civil litigation, as in civil law systems the plaintiff must prove his or her case under the rule of the reversal of the burden of proof. In Anglo-Saxon countries the disclosure obligation in the context of civil litigation diminishes that interference. The workshop triggered a lot of debate around the question of the effectiveness of the rule on the national level and the kind of evidence required and accepted when applying it.

Discussion paper (PDF 80 kB)
Handout presentations (PDF 122 kB)
Audio recording summary workshop proceedings (mp3 2 min.)

Powerpoint presentation Ms. Hélène Masse-Dessen (PDF 151 kB)

go directly to

Skip country select

country country

country

law

Skip law select

law law

law

European legislation
National legislation
Selected case law

content

Workshop on Burden of Proof

go directly to

search