 We
use the Adversary system of trial.
 HOWEVER, the Coroner’s Court, Family
Court, Children’s Cases Program, some
tribunals and some alternative methods of
disputes resolution are more inquisitorial.
 Consider the role of a mediator or
conciliator, they help the party reach a
decision and are actively involved.
 Think of another example...
 Case
conducted
before and
independent &
IMPARTIAL
adjudicator
 Judge decides q’s of
law and procedure
 Judge can ask q’s
ONLY to clarify
points in
examination
 Judge
takes an
ACTIVE role in the
case
 Judge determines
which
evidence/witnesses
need examined
 Judge q’s witnesses
 Parties
are
responsible for the
preparation and
presentation of
their case
 Parties
determine
the witnesses to
be called and
evidence they
want to use
 The
role varies
because parties
are responding
to the directions
given by the
court
 To
represent
the interest of
their client
 To
prepare
and present
their client’s
case to the
court
 To
assist the
judge in
determining
issues that
require
investigating
STRICT rules of
evidence
 Strong reliance on
oral evidence
 Parties collect and
present the best
evidence for their
case
 Previous character
cannot be
introduced until
guilt determined

Greater dependence on
documents as a form of
evidence which are
collected by judge
 Witnesses are free to
describe events rather
than answer q’s


Prior convictions heard
 Conducted
as a
single hearing
 More
adjournments for
further
investigation as
required by the
court
 The
decision maker in the inquisitorial
system takes a more ACTIVE role
 Witness called for by the judge therefore
hopefully less biased
 Heavier reliance on written documents
 Less reliance on legal representation
 Cost of the inquisitorial is relatively
cheaper than the Adversary system
 Consider
which system you think is better.
Are there elements of the Inquisitorial
system we can adopt to make our system
better? Or, should we just make
improvement to the Adversary system?