Plain Statement of Facts

[girlgye]

Instead of an Affadavit. Affadavits were dispensed of about 5 years ago because they were costly and time consuming for the ligitant ie the Affadavit has to be sworn to a competent member of the bar and then copied and handed in.

However, a plain statement of Facts is merely a statement much like a police statement ie you lie you in shit. You sign this is what happened and no swearing in and no witnessing. Simpler and easier and more acceptable by courts.

Ah but is the latter private or is it public?

Is the former Private only or is it public and private?

[girlgye]

Oh in case yas all wondering what I'm doing up almost 24 hours now. I'm doing some depositions with deadlines for tomorrow and that will have to be handed in at different regions across the city.

Anyway here is the answer to the question that was given back to me today. I genuinely don't know whether the man believed what he was telling me of whether he was wilfully misguiding me. so this lurvely solicitor courtesy of google here explains EXACTLY what a STATEMENT is and hey do I need to know what an AFFADAVIT is?

Choose a theme and context. While facts themselves can be proven, their meaning and significance is often based on the context in which they appear and the point-of-view from which they're described. An effective Statement of Facts should have a unified theme that is developed and substantiated with each fact presented. The theme is based not only in the relevant law and policy, but by the emotional charge of the situation and the nature of the parties.

Step 2Begin each fact with a brief sentence of non-argumentative fact. In a manner similar to the style of this article, each enumerated fact in a Statement of Facts should be begin with a brief declaratory sentence.

Step 3Identify parties with subtle but emotionally charged terms. Though it must be done carefully to avoid objection, the parties should be identified consistently throughout the Statement of Fact with a term that conveys the theme and desired perspective. For example, if you want a party to be thought of as a large corporation, don't refer to them with a bland term like "the Defendant," but instead use "the corporation" or "the conglomerate."

Step 4Avoid facts that contradict your theme and perspective. It is the job of the other party to establish facts that run contrary to your statement of the case. Don't do it for them. Instead, emphasize the facts that lead toward your desired outcome.

Step 5Diminish your opponent's facts without exhausting your possibilities. Though the Statement of Facts is not the place to argue, it is possible to offer facts that refute your opponent's presentation. Do this carefully in a way that avoids arguing their facts and instead presents contradictory facts. So, if the other side asserts there was a warning label on the package, you can say, "Despite the presence of the warning label, the label itself was relatively small and not obvious, and it's language was not easily understood."

Step 6Show, don't tell. Just as a fiction writer is most effective when he describes a scene rather than stating emotions, the Statement of Facts should paint a vivid picture in its presentation of facts. For example, instead of saying, "the spouse reacted angrily," say "the spouse reacted by throwing the phone against the wall and shouting profanities."

[girlgye]

In a civil trial, the law itself is usually not up for debate. But the facts might be, and they can determine which laws are applicable. To a large extent, legal confrontation in the lower courts is an attempt to present the facts of the case in a way that prompt an application of law that leads to the desired outcome. A Statement of Facts does not present a legal argument, but can nonetheless create a compelling reason why a certain line of legal reasoning should be followed by the court

[girlgye]

All the above his words not mine.

[girlgye]

Now why would I be compelled by a solicitor to write a statement of fact instead of an affadavit in view of this?

[kenw232]

Truth is expressed by means of an affidavit (Lev. 5:4-5; Lev, 6:3-5; Lev 19:11-13; Num. 30:2; Natt, 5:33; James 5:12).

An unrebutted affidavit stands as the truth in Commerce (1 Pet. 1:25; Heb. 6:13-15. Legal maxim: "He who does not deny, admits.").

An unrebutted affidavit becomes the judgement in Commerce (Heb 6:16-17, Any proceeding in a court, tribunal, or arbitration forum consists of a contest, or "duel," of commercial affidavits wherein the points remaining unrebutted in the end stand as the truth and the matters to which the judgement of the law is applied.).

[yozhik]

As a living being, you can attest to having first hand knowledge of an account, as evidenced by an affidavit, which is deemed truth.

A corporate person is a legal fiction and unable to attest to anything.
An officer of a corporation can attest ON BEHALF of the corporation, but then this becomes a re-presentation.

This is why they want lawyer to go against lawyer, so it is re-presentation versus re-presentation ... apples with apples.
When sui juris, your truth can not be matched.
You have first hand knowledge; they have re-presented testimony.

[pleasuredome]

Truth is expressed by means of an affidavit (Lev. 5:4-5; Lev, 6:3-5; Lev 19:11-13; Num. 30:2; Natt, 5:33; James 5:12).

An unrebutted affidavit stands as the truth in Commerce (1 Pet. 1:25; Heb. 6:13-15. Legal maxim: "He who does not deny, admits.").

An unrebutted affidavit becomes the judgement in Commerce (Heb 6:16-17, Any proceeding in a court, tribunal, or arbitration forum consists of a contest, or "duel," of commercial affidavits wherein the points remaining unrebutted in the end stand as the truth and the matters to which the judgement of the law is applied.).

thanks for posting this :cool: