�山����

It is well established in law that in civil litigation the burden of proving an assertion to the required degree of certainty (that is, the standard of proof) normally lies on the party bringing the matter or making the allegation. In civil cases, the standard of proof is on a “preponderance of the evidence” or on a “balance of probabilities”. In matters of selection of staff, the role of the Dispute Tribunal is to review the challenged selection process to determine whether a candidate has received fair consideration, discrimination and bias are absent, proper procedures have been followed, and all relevant material has been taken into consideration. There is always a presumption that official acts have been regularly performed. But this presumption is a rebuttable one. The presumption of regularity is rebutted by evidence of a failure to follow applicable procedures, bias in the decision-making process, and consideration of irrelevant material or extraneous factors. The party making the allegation must establish a prima facie case or a case that, on its face, amounts to discrimination. If the applicant is able to establish a prima facie case, then the burden of proof shifts to the other party to show, on the balance of probabilities, that its actions were not discriminatory.