Last month Lady Hale and Lords Neuberger, Kerr, Clarke and Reed heard the onward appeal on the issue whether the Inner House erred in failing to hold that, in cases where the respondent intervenes to stop an alleged marriage of convenience and makes a removal order on that basis, the evidential burden of proof rests with the respondent and requires to be
discharged on the balance of probabilities.
[43] Looking at the plaintiff's evidence in light
of all
of the evidence, I have concluded that the plaintiff has not
discharged the burden
on her to establish
on a
balance of probabilities that she was injured in the car accident.