What proof standard is typically required in Administrative Law?

In administrative law, the proof standard typically required is "more likely than not." This standard means that the evidence presented must show that there is a greater than 50% likelihood that the claims made are true. It is a lower threshold compared to the standards used in criminal law and some aspects of civil law.

The rationale behind this standard is that administrative proceedings often deal with regulatory matters rather than criminal consequences. Therefore, the focus is on whether the evidence suggests that something is more probable than not, which allows regulatory bodies to make reasonable decisions based on the evidence available without requiring the higher certainty levels demanded in criminal cases.

In contrast, the standards of "beyond a reasonable doubt" and "clear and convincing evidence" are predominantly used in criminal trials and certain civil cases that involve significant repercussions. For instance, "beyond a reasonable doubt" is typically applied in criminal cases, requiring a high level of certainty about a defendant's guilt. Similarly, "clear and convincing evidence" is often employed in civil cases involving serious issues such as fraud or parental rights, demanding a greater level of confidence than "more likely than not" but less than "beyond a reasonable doubt." The "preponderance of evidence" standard, while similar to "more likely