Quick Tips: How will a Judge Assess your Credibility?

By Matt Lalande in Hamilton Personal Injury Lawyer, Trial & Courtroom on April 05, 2023

As legal professionals we understand that success in the courtroom hinges on more than just knowledge of the law. It’s about skillfully blending our legal expertise with persuasive storytelling, calculated tactics, and an unwavering attention to detail so that we may fight for our client’s cause but also to leave a lasting impression on the judge and jury. Once and a while we like to explore the strategies and techniques and tips which help us better become a formidable force in the courtroom, no matter if you are representing a car accident victim, someone show was hurt in a motorcycle accident, pedestrian, trucking or bicycle accident.

How do Judges Assess your Credibility?

In a recent car accident trial*, Judge Basram assessed the truthfulness of the testimony of the plaintiff. He was guided by the test set out in Faryna v. Chorny, [1952] 2 D.L.R. 354 at 357, 1951 CanLII 252 (B.C.C.A.) where the Court stated: […]. In short, the real test of the truth of the story of a witness in such a case must be its harmony with the preponderance of the probabilities which a practical and informed person would readily recognize as reasonable in that place and in those conditions. […]

Then in assessing credibility, Justice Basram applied the factors described by Justice Dillon in Bradshaw v. Stenner, 2010 BCSC 1398 at para. 186, affirmed by the British Columbia Court of Appeal 2012 BCCA 296:

“Credibility involves an assessment of the trustworthiness of a witness’ testimony based upon the veracity or sincerity of a witness and the accuracy of the evidence that the witness provides (Raymond v. Bosanquet (Township) (1919), 59 S.C.R. 452, 50 D.L.R. 560 (S.C.C.)).

905-333-8888

CONTACT US

The art of assessment involves examination of various factors such as the ability and opportunity to observe events, the firmness of his memory, the ability to resist the influence of interest to modify his recollection, whether the witness’ evidence harmonizes with independent evidence that has been accepted, whether the witness changes his testimony during direct and cross-examination, whether the witness’ testimony seems unreasonable, impossible, or unlikely, whether a witness has a motive to lie, and the demeanour of a witness generally (Wallace v. Davis, [1926] 31 O.W.N. 202 (Ont.H.C.); [Farnya]; R. v. S.(R.D.), [1997] 3 S.C.R. 484 at para.128 (S.C.C.)). Ultimately, the validity of the evidence depends on whether the evidence is consistent with the probabilities affecting the case as a whole and shown to be in existence at the time (Farnya at para. 356).”

What’s the Takeaway?

In Canada, judges are responsible for assessing the credibility of witnesses in a legal proceeding. There is no set formula for assessing credibility, as it is a fact-specific determination that must be made on a case-by-case basis. However, Canadian courts have established some general principles that guide judges in assessing credibility.

One of the key factors that judges consider is the consistency of the witness’s testimony. If a witness’s testimony is consistent with their earlier statements, it is more likely to be considered credible. Conversely, if a witness’s testimony is inconsistent or contradictory, it may be viewed as less credible.

Another factor that judges consider is the demeanor of the witness. Judges pay attention to how the witness behaves while giving testimony, including their body language and tone of voice. Witnesses who appear confident and composed may be viewed as more credible, while those who appear nervous or evasive may be viewed as less credible.

Additionally, judges may consider the witness’s personal characteristics, such as their age, education level, and past experiences. For example, a witness who has a history of dishonesty may be viewed as less credible, while a witness who has a reputation for honesty and integrity may be viewed as more credible.

Overall, judges in Canada assess the credibility of witnesses based on a range of factors and considerations, and the determination of credibility is ultimately up to the judge’s discretion based on the evidence presented in the case.

Have you been involved in a Serious Accident?

If you or a loved one has been involved in a serious car accident, call our Hamilton Personal Injury Lawyers today, toll-free, no matter where you are in Ontario at 1-844-LALANDE or local in the Hamilton / Burlington area at 905-333-8888 or fill in a contact form on our website today. Our Hamilton car accident lawyers would be more than happy to provide you and your family a free consultation and free case evaluation regarding your pain and suffering, insurance coverage, inform you of your legal rights as a car accident victim and your options concerning your car accident related injuries and losses. Remember, we work on a contingency fee basis, meaning that if we don’t win, you don’t pay.

*Ricketts v Tatla, [2023] BCJ No 383