Sentences with phrase «technology upon the evidence»

There is inadequate understanding of the impact of technology upon the evidence that courts and tribunals deal with, and the need for evidentiary and procedural laws to be sufficiently flexible to deal with technologies that have different natures, uses, strengths, weaknesses and dangers.

Not exact matches

«This prosecution has depended upon previously unavailable scientific technology and techniques which led to the discovery of the new evidence.

Extensive research into the impact this flood of technology is having upon us is providing solid evidence that chronic exposure to even low - level radiation (like that from mobile / cell phones), can cause a variety of cancers (especially brain cancer), impair immunity, and contribute to Alzheimer's disease, dementia, heart disease, and many other ailments.

Finally, as a learning professional, I have a responsibility to myself to make sure I am fully up - to - date with current best practice and evidence - based learning theory, that I am constantly reflecting upon and looking to improve my skills, and that I am conversant with the latest technologies that could enhance learning in terms of its effectiveness or efficiency.

There is a price to be paid in necessary legal infrastructure of laws and courts if it is to provide adequate controls and safeguards for the technology upon which our lives are dependent and judges» decision are based; see: «Guilt By Mobile Phone Tracking Shouldn't Make «Evidence to the Contrary» Impossible» (pdf.; and see the summary, using the same title on Slaw, October 4, 2016).

Therefore there is very likely to be an unacceptably high probability of judgments being based upon inadequate and faulty evidence if the use of ERMS technology to produce records as evidence is not adequately reviewed.

And worse, the drafting committee of the 2nd edition of the «Sedona Canada Principles — Addressing Electronic Discovery,» will not compensate for the impact of the change (from pre-electronic paper records technology, to electronic records management technology) upon the efficacy of all laws concerning the use of electronic records as evidence.

To the contrary of Sedona Canada 2nd, electronic records management technology makes these 3 concepts more interdependent in law and necessary application: (1) the «system integrity concept» of the e-records provisions of the Evidence Acts; (2) the «proportionality principle» of electronic discovery proceedings; and, (3) the «Prime Directive» of 72.34: «an organization shall always be prepared to produce its records as evidence», i.e., records systems must always be kept in compliance with this national standard (otherwise, the e-records produced, and the adequacy of their production, should not be relied upon because, the quality of records system integrity determines the quality of records integrity — that is the «system integrity concept&Evidence Acts; (2) the «proportionality principle» of electronic discovery proceedings; and, (3) the «Prime Directive» of 72.34: «an organization shall always be prepared to produce its records as evidence», i.e., records systems must always be kept in compliance with this national standard (otherwise, the e-records produced, and the adequacy of their production, should not be relied upon because, the quality of records system integrity determines the quality of records integrity — that is the «system integrity concept&evidence», i.e., records systems must always be kept in compliance with this national standard (otherwise, the e-records produced, and the adequacy of their production, should not be relied upon because, the quality of records system integrity determines the quality of records integrity — that is the «system integrity concept»).

Its high cost, dependence upon the quality of electronic records management, interdependence with admissibility of evidence rules and practices, and development of TAR (technology aided review) software, which in itself raises many complex issues, will maintain disclosure and discovery's importance to all litigators for many years to come.

«Technologically competent» also requires knowledge of the electronic technology that now produces most of the evidence, and very frequently used types of evidence; for example, these kinds of evidence: (1) records are now the most frequently used kind of evidence but most often come from very complex electronic records management systems; (2) mobile phone tracking evidence because we all carry mobile phones; (3) breathalyzer device readings because they are the basis of more than 95 % of impaired driving cases; and, (4) expert opinion evidence that depends upon data produced by electronic systems and devices.

With litigation support tools, we might invest in one technology to assist with managing our evidence whether it is documents, transcripts, or work product developed based upon the evidence.

No law firm has the necessary degree of specialization of staff, legal materials used, re-use of previously created work - product, or scaled volumes of production, to be able to cope with rapidly expanding volumes of laws, complexity of laws based upon technology, and the masses of records created by the automating of records by electronic technology — every interaction, communication, and transmission that we have now, produces a record, which could be related to some legal service, and records are now the most frequently used kind of evidence in legal proceedings.

The three analogies: (1) whereas a pre-electronic paper record can be symbolized by a piece of paper in a file drawer, an electronic record is like a drop of water in a pool of water, i.e., it is completely dependent upon its ERMS for its existence, accessibility, and «integrity» (as that word is used in the electronic records provisions of the Evidence Acts; e.g. s. 31.2 (1)(a) CEA); (2) if expert opinion evidence were rendered admissible in the way that electronic records are, there would be no evidence presented, nor cross-examination allowed, as to the qualifications of the expert witnesses, i.e., the «qualifications» of an electronic record being the state of records management of the ERMS in which it is stored; (3) going from a horse - powered transportation system to a motor vehicle - based transportation system has required a vast amount of new laws, regulations, and enforcement personnel, including police officers, judges, and lawyers, i.e., stepping up to a new technology requires that it be controlled by new laws and regulations, otherwise it will cause injury, damage, and inEvidence Acts; e.g. s. 31.2 (1)(a) CEA); (2) if expert opinion evidence were rendered admissible in the way that electronic records are, there would be no evidence presented, nor cross-examination allowed, as to the qualifications of the expert witnesses, i.e., the «qualifications» of an electronic record being the state of records management of the ERMS in which it is stored; (3) going from a horse - powered transportation system to a motor vehicle - based transportation system has required a vast amount of new laws, regulations, and enforcement personnel, including police officers, judges, and lawyers, i.e., stepping up to a new technology requires that it be controlled by new laws and regulations, otherwise it will cause injury, damage, and inevidence were rendered admissible in the way that electronic records are, there would be no evidence presented, nor cross-examination allowed, as to the qualifications of the expert witnesses, i.e., the «qualifications» of an electronic record being the state of records management of the ERMS in which it is stored; (3) going from a horse - powered transportation system to a motor vehicle - based transportation system has required a vast amount of new laws, regulations, and enforcement personnel, including police officers, judges, and lawyers, i.e., stepping up to a new technology requires that it be controlled by new laws and regulations, otherwise it will cause injury, damage, and inevidence presented, nor cross-examination allowed, as to the qualifications of the expert witnesses, i.e., the «qualifications» of an electronic record being the state of records management of the ERMS in which it is stored; (3) going from a horse - powered transportation system to a motor vehicle - based transportation system has required a vast amount of new laws, regulations, and enforcement personnel, including police officers, judges, and lawyers, i.e., stepping up to a new technology requires that it be controlled by new laws and regulations, otherwise it will cause injury, damage, and injustice.

(4) the consequences of more laws based upon technology; and the fact that almost every electronic communication, interaction, and service automatically creates a record that is potentially evidence and relevant to some legal service.

The above five poorly used laws and procedures in regard to such an important area of law and practice (as is the use of records as evidence), due to ignorance of the technology upon which such laws must be based, provide support for the proposition that sometimes laws are too important to be left to lawyers — lawyers without technical support.