Admissibility of Polygraph Evidence in Canadian Civil, Labour, Youth, and Family Courts

The admissibility of polygraph evidence in Canadian courts remains a contentious issue, with varying decisions depending on the type of court and the circumstances of the case. In civil, labour, youth, and family courts, polygraph evidence has been subject to different interpretations, where judges have taken positions ranging from full acceptance to outright rejection. This nuanced approach reflects the broader legal and ethical considerations of introducing polygraph results, particularly around concerns about reliability and the influence of precedent from R. v. Béland and Phillips in criminal cases.

The Impact of R. v. Béland and Phillips

The Supreme Court of Canada’s decision in R. v. Béland and Phillips (1987) significantly shaped the legal landscape for polygraph evidence in Canadian courts, particularly in the criminal context. In that ruling, Justice William Rogers McIntyre determined that polygraph evidence was inadmissible in criminal trials, reasoning that it could mislead juries and that the court should be the ultimate arbiter of credibility. This decision essentially barred polygraph results from criminal proceedings in Canada due to concerns about their reliability and the potential to undermine the jury’s role.

However, the question remains whether this ruling applies to civil, labour, youth, and family courts, which operate under different rules of evidence and often without juries. Some judges have extended the logic of R. v. Béland to civil matters, while others have taken a more flexible approach, especially when polygraph evidence can assist in evaluating credibility in cases where conflicting testimony exists.

While polygraph test results are not automatically admitted, they may be allowed if relevant, particularly in cases where answers to polygraph questions constitute admissions against interest or if both parties agree to their use. Judges consider such evidence case-by-case, balancing its probative value against concerns about reliability and fairness

Admissibility in Civil Courts

In Canadian civil courts, the admissibility of polygraph evidence is subject to greater flexibility compared to criminal courts, though it is still approached with caution. Some civil court judges have rejected polygraph evidence, citing R. v. Béland, while others have permitted its introduction in specific circumstances, particularly when both parties consent to its use. In these instances, polygraph evidence may be considered a probative tool to assess the credibility of witnesses, especially in disputes involving contracts, fraud, or defamation where the central issue is often one party’s word against the other’s.

Judges who admit polygraph evidence in civil courts tend to view it as part of a broader evidentiary framework, weighing its relevance alongside other forms of testimony and documentation. They often stress that polygraph results should not be treated as definitive proof of truth or falsehood but as one element to be considered in the court’s overall evaluation of the case.

Polygraph Evidence in Labour Courts

Polygraph testing is occasionally introduced in labour disputes, particularly in cases involving employee misconduct, fraud, or theft. Canadian labour arbitrators and tribunals take varied approaches to polygraph evidence, with admissibility largely depending on the context of the dispute and the collective agreements in place. In some labour cases, arbitrators have allowed polygraph results to be considered, especially when an employer and union agree on its use as part of an internal investigation.

However, many labour tribunals are reluctant to rely solely on polygraph evidence due to concerns about fairness and the potential for coercion in employment settings. Polygraph results may be used to supplement other evidence, such as witness testimony, video surveillance, or document analysis. In such cases, the polygraph test is viewed as one of several tools to establish facts in a workplace investigation.

Youth and Family Courts

In youth and family courts, the admissibility of polygraph evidence is approached with even greater caution, given the sensitive nature of the cases and the emphasis on the best interests of children and family members. Courts dealing with issues such as child custody, abuse allegations, or parental fitness prioritize the protection and welfare of minors, often preferring less adversarial methods of resolving disputes.

Polygraph evidence is rarely admitted in youth and family courts, but in certain situations, particularly in high-conflict custody disputes, it may be considered if it can help assess the credibility of allegations. For instance, if one parent accuses the other of inappropriate behavior or dishonesty, and the court is faced with conflicting testimony, a polygraph test might be used to provide additional insight. However, judges in these courts are typically wary of giving polygraph results too much weight, especially in cases where the emotional or psychological state of the parties could influence test results.

Divergent Judicial Views on Polygraph Evidence

The core issue in the admissibility of polygraph evidence across these courts lies in how different judges interpret the purpose of the polygraph and the importance of credibility assessments in non-criminal contexts. Some judges maintain that the principles laid out in R. v. Béland apply universally, including in civil and family law matters, arguing that polygraph tests are inherently unreliable and risk shifting the court’s role as the ultimate judge of credibility to the polygraph examiner.

On the other hand, a growing number of judges take the view that polygraph evidence should be allowed if it is probative, relevant, and can assist the court in making a decision. In these cases, the polygraph is not seen as a definitive lie detector but rather as a tool to be weighed alongside other evidence. These judges often emphasize the importance of context, such as whether the polygraph was conducted voluntarily and whether both parties consented to its use.

Considerations of Credibility and Fairness

At the heart of the debate over the admissibility of polygraph evidence in civil, labour, youth, and family courts is the question of credibility. In many cases, especially in family or labour disputes, the court must decide which party’s version of events is more believable. Polygraph tests, which measure physiological responses to questions, offer one way to assess credibility, but their reliability is not absolute, and the potential for false positives or negatives complicates their use.

Moreover, there are ethical considerations, particularly in labour disputes or family cases, where power imbalances could lead to one party feeling coerced into undergoing a polygraph examination. The Canadian courts are mindful of these concerns, often setting high standards for the admissibility of such evidence to ensure fairness in the judicial process.

Conclusion

The admissibility of polygraph evidence in Canadian civil, labour, youth, and family courts remains a subject of judicial discretion and debate. While the R. v. Béland decision casts a long shadow over the use of polygraph evidence in criminal courts, its application to civil and non-criminal matters varies depending on the views of individual judges and the specifics of the case. Judges who admit polygraph evidence often do so with caution, ensuring that it is weighed alongside other forms of evidence and that it is not treated as a definitive measure of truth.

In the end, the role of polygraph evidence in Canadian courts reflects broader questions about the balance between truth-seeking and the limitations of scientific tools in legal proceedings. As the legal system continues to evolve, so too will the conversation around the use of polygraph tests in determining credibility across various judicial contexts.