 | This articleneeds additional citations forverification. Please helpimprove this article byadding citations to reliable sources. Unsourced material may be challenged and removed. Find sources: "Bench trial" – news ·newspapers ·books ·scholar ·JSTOR(February 2022) (Learn how and when to remove this message) |
Abench trial is atrial byjudge, as opposed to ajury.[1] The term applies most appropriately to any administrative hearing in relation to asummary offense to distinguish the type of trial. Many legal systems (Roman,Islamic) use bench trials for most or all cases or for certain types of cases.
As a jury renders averdict, in a bench trial, a judge does the same by making afinding.[2]
Most civil trials proceed without a jury and are heard by a judge sitting alone.
Summary criminal trials may be heard by a single district judge (magistrates' court) or by a panel of at least two, but more usually three, magistrates.
Section 47 of theCriminal Justice Act 2003 allows a bench trial for indictable offences, but is rarely used, having been exercised only two times since its inception.[3]
Most civil trials inScotland are conducted in asheriff court by asheriff sitting alone. In theCourt of Session, a judge in either the outer or inner house usually sits alone; but may sit with a jury in certain trials such aspersonal injury claims.
Summary criminal trials are conducted by a sheriff in a sheriff court or ajustice of the peace in thejustice of the peace court sitting alone as regulated by theCriminal Procedure (Scotland) Act 1995. Those trials requiring juries are called solemn procedure and are also regulated under the Act.
One of the recommendations of the Commission of Inquiry 2008–2009 inTurks and Caicos was that provisions be made for criminal trials without juries, following the precedent inEngland and Wales. Other examples cited included theUnited States, theCommonwealth of Nations includingIndia andCanada, theBritish overseas territories of theFalkland Islands andSt. Helena, and theNetherlands.[4]
| This sectionneeds additional citations forverification. Please helpimprove this article byadding citations to reliable sources in this section. Unsourced material may be challenged and removed.(June 2022) (Learn how and when to remove this message) |
InUnited States law, for most criminal cases that proceed to trial,trial by jury is usually a matter of course as it is a constitutional right under theSixth Amendment and cannot be waived without certain requirements. In the federal court system, under Rule 23 of theFederal Rules of Criminal Procedure, if a defendant is entitled to a jury trial, the trial must be by jury unless the defendant waives a jury trial in writing. In the various state court systems, waiver of jury trial can vary by jurisdiction. Missouri has Missouri Supreme Court Rule 27.01(b),[5] "The defendant may, with the assent of the court, waive a trial by jury and submit the trial of any criminal case to the court..."; the prosecution needs not consent.
With bench trials, the judge plays the role of the jury asfinder of fact in addition to makingconclusions of law. In some bench trials, both sides have already stipulated to all the facts in the case (such ascivil disobedience cases designed to test the constitutionality of a law). Because of needing fewer formalities, these cases are usually faster than jury trials. For example, there is nojury selection phase and no need for sequestration orjury instructions.
A bench trial (whether criminal or civil) that is presided over by a judge has some distinctive characteristics, but it is similar to a jury trial. For example, therules of evidence and methods ofobjection are the same in a bench trial as in a jury trial. Bench trials, however, are frequently less formal than jury trials. It is often less necessary to protect the record with objections, and sometimes evidence is acceptedde bene or provisionally, subject to the possibility of being struck in the future.
All trials in India since 1973 are heard by a judge or a division bench of judges. The main reason for the abolishment of jury trial in India was due to a popular caseK.M Nanavati vs State of Maharashtra, in which the jury gave a verdict of not guilty even when all the evidence was present against the accused, resulting in ajury nullification.[6]
In most countries with "Roman law" orcivil law, there is no "jury" in the English sense, and trials are necessarily bench trials. However, in more complicated cases,lay judges can be called. They are not randomly selected, as juries are. They are professional, although not legally trained as jurists, and vote as judges. One notable exception, from French law, iscour d'assises, where jurors are allotted and vote alongside professional judges.