|
The presumption of regularity〔For this name, see Cooper, Simon & Murphy, Peter & Beaumont, John. Cases & Materials on Evidence. Fourth Edition. Oxford University Press. 1994. p. 86〕 is a presumption that forms part of the law of evidence of England and Wales. It is expressed by the maxim of law〔Archbold Criminal Pleading, Evidence and Practice, 1999, para 10-5 at p. 1130〕 "omnia praesumuntur rite et solemniter esse acta donec probetur in contrarium",〔For this version, see Archbold Criminal Pleading, Evidence and Practice, 1999, para 10-5 at p. 1130〕 which may be shortened to "omnia praesumuntur rite et solemniter esse acta"〔For this version, see Cooper, Simon & Murphy, Peter & Beaumont, John. Cases & Materials on Evidence. Fourth Edition. Oxford University Press. 1994. p. 86〕 or "omnia praesumuntur rite esse acta".〔For this version, seeArchbold Criminal Pleading, Evidence and Practice, 1999, para 10-5 at p. 1130〕 ==Official actions== Where it has been proved that an "official act" has been done, it will be presumed, until the contrary is proved, that the said act "complied with any necessary formalities" and that the person who did it was "duly appointed".〔Cooper, Simon & Murphy, Peter & Beaumont, John. Cases & Materials on Evidence. Fourth Edition. Oxford University Press. 1994. p. 86〕〔Archbold Criminal Pleading, Evidence and Practice, 1999, para 10-5 at p. 1130〕 This is a presumption of law.〔Archbold Criminal Pleading, Evidence and Practice, 1999, p. 1130, see heading "B" to paras. 10-4 and 10-5〕 The following cases are relevant to this presumption: *R v Gordon (1789) 1 Leach 515, (1789) 1 East PC 315 *R v Jones (1806) 31 St Tr 251, (1806) 2 Camp 131 *R v Verelst (1813) 3 Camp 432 *R v Catesby (1824) 2 B & C 814, (1824) 4 Dow & Ry KB 434, (1824) 2 Dow & Ry MC 278 *R v Rees (1834) 6 C & P 606 *R v Murphy (1837) 8 C & P 297 *R v Townsend (1841) C & Mar 178 *R v Newton (1843) 1 C & K 469 *R v Manwaring (1856) 26 LJMC 10, (1856) Dears & B 132, (1856) 7 Cox 192 *R v Cresswell (1876) 1 QBD 446, (1876) 33 LT 760, (1876) 40 JP 536, (1876) 13 Cox 126 *R v Stewart (1876) 13 Cox 296 *R v Roberts (1878) 14 Cox 101, (1878) 42 JP 630, (1878) 38 LT 690, CCR * Gibbins v Skinner () 2 K.B. 379, () 1 All E.R. 1049, () 1 T.L.R. 1159, (1951) 115 J.P. 360, 49 L.G.R. 713 *Campbell v Wallsend Shipway and Engineering Co Ltd () Crim LR 351, DC *Dillon v R () AC 484, () 2 WLR 538, () 1 All ER 1017, 74 Cr App R 274, () Crim LR 438, PC *Gage v Jones () RTR 508, DC *Kynaston v Director of Public Prosecutions, 87 Cr App R 200, DC 抄文引用元・出典: フリー百科事典『 ウィキペディア（Wikipedia）』 ■ウィキペディアで「presumption of regularity」の詳細全文を読む スポンサード リンク
|