- Best Evidence An original document or object offered as proof of a fact in a lawsuit as opposed to a photocopy of, or other substitute for, the item or the testimony of a witness describing it.
People also ask
What is the definition of best evidence?
What is the best evidence rule?
What is the best legal evidence to be produced?
Can a copy of a document be used as evidence?
Best Evidence. An original document or object offered as proof of a fact in a lawsuit as opposed to a photocopy of, or other substitute for, the item or the testimony of a witness describing it. Best evidence, also known as primary evidence, usually denotes an original writing, which is considered the most reliable proof of its existence and its contents.
May 23, 2017 · The best evidence rule is a rule of evidence that requires an original document, photograph, or other piece of evidence be introduced to the court to prove the contents of that same item. As an example of the best evidence rule’s purpose, consider a plaintiff arguing that a specific provision to a contract didn’t exist.
Best evidence refers to a rule of evidence that requires an original of a writing, recording, or photograph in order to prove its content. Where the best evidence rule applies, copies of the original will not be accepted unless it can be shown that the original is unavailable due to no fault of the party offering the evidence. This operates as a rule of exclusion.
Legal Definition of best evidence rule. : a rule of evidence: in order to prove what is said or pictured in a writing, recording, or photograph the original must be provided unless the original is lost, destroyed, or otherwise unobtainable. — called also original writing rule.
A written instrument is itself always regarded as the primary or best possible evidence of its existence and contents; a copy, or the recollection of a witness, would be secondary evidence. Law Dictionary – Alternative Legal Definition
Best Evidence Rule. The best evidence rule applies when a party wants to admit as evidence the contents of a document at trial, but that the original document is not available. In this case, the party must provide an acceptable excuse for its absence. If the document itself is not available, and the court finds the excuse provided acceptable, then the party is allowed to use secondary evidence to prove the contents of the document and have it as admissible evidence.
best evidence rule n. the legal doctrine that an original piece of evidence, particularly a document, is superior to a copy. If the original is available, a copy will not be allowed as evidence in a trial.
- Why Is Research Evidence Better Than Expert Opinion Alone?
- What Studies Are More Reliable?
- Why We Shouldn’T Read Studies
- Why We Should Read Systematic Reviews
- Three Reasons Why We Shouldn’T Read (Most) Systematic Reviews
- How to Find The Best Available Evidence?
- Three Alternatives to Access The Best Evidence?
- The Future
In a broad sense, research evidence can be any systematic observation in order to establish facts and reach conclusions. Anything not fulfilling this definition is typically classified as “expert opinion”, the basis of which includes experience with patients, an understanding of biology, knowledge of preclinical research, as well as of the results of studies. Using expert opinion as the only basis to make decisions has proved problematic because in practice doctors often introduce new treatme...
Not all evidence is equally reliable.Any study design, qualitative or quantitative, where data is collected from individuals or groups of people is usually called a primary study. There are many types of primary study designs, but for each type of health question there is one that provides more reliable information.For treatment decisions, there is consensus that the most reliable primary study is the randomised controlled trial (RCT). In this type of study, patients are randomly assigned to...
An enormous amount of effort is required to be able to identify and summarise everything we know with regard to any given health intervention. The amount of data has soared dramatically. A conservative estimation is there are more than 35,000 medical journals and almost 20 million research articles published every year. On the other hand, up to half of existing data might be unpublished.How can anyone keep up with all this? And how can you tell if the research is good or not? Each primary stu...
Most of the time a single study doesn’t tell us enough. The best answers are found by combining the results of many studies.A systematic review is a type of research that looks at the results from all of the good-quality studies. It puts together the results of these individual studies into one summary. This gives an estimate of a treatment’s risks and benefits. Sometimes these reviews include a statistical analysis, called a meta-analysis, which combines the results of several studies to giv...
Firstly, systematic reviews have proliferated over time. From 11 per day in 2010 , they skyrocketed up to 40 per day or more in 2015. Some have described this production as having reached epidemic proportions where the large majority of produced systematic reviews and meta-analyses are unnecessary, misleading, and/or conflicted. So, finding more than one systematic review for a question is the rule more than the exception, and it is not unusual to find several dozen for the hottest question...
Considering the massive amount of information available, we can quickly discard periodically reviewing our favorite journals as a means of sourcing the best available evidence.The traditional approach to search for evidence has been using major databases, such as PubMed, or EMBASE. These constitute comprehensive sources including millions of relevant, but also irrelevant articles. Even though in the past they were the preferred approach to searching for evidence, information overload has made...
Alternative 1 – Pick the best systematic reviewMastering the art of identifying, appraising and applying high-quality systematic reviews into practice can be very rewarding. It is not easy, but once mastered it gives a view of the bigger picture: of what is known, and what is not known.The best single-source of highest-quality systematic reviews is produced by an international organisation called the Cochrane Collaboration, named after a well-known researcher. They can be accessed at The Coch...
Finding the best available evidence is more challenging than it was in the dawn of the evidence-based movement, and the main cause is the exponential growth of ‘evidence-based’ information, in any of the flavours described above.However, with a little bit of patience and practice, the busy clinician will discover evidence-based practice is far easier than it was 5 or 10 years ago. We are entering a stage were information is flowing between the different systems, technology is being harnessed...
1. Bastian H, Glasziou P, Chalmers I. Seventy-five trials and eleven systematic reviews a day: how will we ever keep up? PLoS Med. 2010 Sep 21;7(9):e1000326. doi: 10.1371/journal.pmed.1000326 2. Epistemonikos database [filter= systematic review; year=2015]. A Free, Relational, Collaborative, Multilingual Database of Health Evidence. https://www.epistemonikos.org/en/search?&q=*&classification=systematic-review&year_start=2015&year_end=2015&fl=14542 Accessed 5 Jan 2017. 3. Ioannidis JP. The Ma...