law Law is a set of rules that are created and are enforceable by social or governmental institutions to regulate behavior,Robertson, ''Crimes against humanity'', 90. with its precise definition a matter of longstanding debate. It has been vario ...

, a test is a commonly applied method of evaluation used to resolve matters of

jurisprudence Jurisprudence, or legal theory, is the theoretical study of the propriety of law. Scholars of jurisprudence seek to explain the nature of law in its most general form and they also seek to achieve a deeper understanding of legal reasoning a ...

. In the context of a

trial In law, a trial is a coming together of Party (law), parties to a :wikt:dispute, dispute, to present information (in the form of evidence (law), evidence) in a tribunal, a formal setting with the authority to Adjudication, adjudicate claims or d ...

, a

hearing Hearing, or auditory perception, is the ability to perceive sounds In physics, sound is a vibration that propagates as an acoustic wave, through a transmission medium such as a gas, liquid or solid. In human physiology and psycholog ...

discovery Discovery may refer to: * Discovery (observation), observing or finding something unknown * Discovery (fiction), a character's learning something unknown * Discovery (law), a process in courts of law relating to evidence Discovery, The Discover ...

, or other kinds of

legal proceedings Legal proceeding is an activity that seeks to invoke the power of a tribunal in order to enforce a law. Although the term may be defined more broadly or more narrowly as circumstances require, it has been noted that " e term ''legal proceedings'' i ...

, the resolution of certain questions of fact or

may hinge on the application of one or more legal tests. Tests are often formulated from the logical analysis of a judicial decision or a court order where it appears that a

finder of fact A trier of fact or finder of fact is a person or group who determines which Question of fact, facts are available in a legal proceeding (usually a trial) and how relevant they are to deciding its outcome. To determine a fact is to decide, from th ...

or the

court A court is any person or institution, often as a government institution, with the authority to adjudicate legal disputes between parties and carry out the administration of justice in civil, criminal, and administrative matters in accordance ...

made a particular decision after contemplating a well-defined set of circumstances. It is assumed that evaluating any given set of circumstances under a legal test will lead to an unambiguous and repeatable result.

Kinds of legal tests

Bright-line rule A bright-line rule (or bright-line test) is a clearly defined rule or standard, composed of objective factors, which leaves little or no room for varying interpretation. The purpose of a bright-line rule is to produce predictable and consistent ...

Balancing test A balancing test is any judicial test in which the jurists weigh the importance of multiple factors in a legal case. Proponents of such legal tests argue that they allow a deeper consideration of complex issues than a bright-line rule can allow. B ...

International law

Berne three-step test The Berne three-step test is a clause that is included in several international treaties on intellectual property. Signatories of those treaties agree to standardize possible limitations and exceptions to exclusive rights under their respective na ...

* Habitual residence test * ''Caroline'' test

Common law

* "But-for" test

Canada

* ''Andrews'' test * Air of reality test (see als
R v Fontaine
* Assumed Jurisdiction test *Central management and control test * ''Collins'' Test *Community Standards of Tolerance test
Conway Test
*Degradation or Dehumanization Test * Denial of Bail test * ''Gladue'' Test * ''Grant'' Test (see also ''

R v Suberu ''R v Suberu'is a leading decision of the Supreme Court of Canada on section 9 and section 10 of the ''Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms''. The Court applied the new test for detention created in the companion case of ''R v Grant'' and rule ...

'') * Indecent conduct test (see also ''

R v Kouri ''R v Kouri'' 2005 SCC 81 (CanLII), was a decision of the Supreme Court of Canada that, along with its sister case ''R v Labaye'', established that harm is the sole defining element of indecency in Canadian criminal law. The case involved a club in ...

'') * Integral to Distinctive Culture test *

Interjurisdictional immunity In Canadian Constitutional law, interjurisdictional immunity is the legal doctrine that determines which legislation arising from one level of jurisdiction may be applicable to matters covered at another level. Interjurisdictional immunity is an ex ...

*Internal Necessities Test or Artistic Defense * ''Meiorin'' test * ''Law'' test *Multiple Access test * Necessarily incidental doctrine *

Oakes test Section 1 of the ''Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms'' is the section that confirms that the rights listed in the Charter are ''guaranteed''. The section is also known as the reasonable limits clause or limitations clause, as it legally all ...

* Overbreadth test * Patent unreasonableness test * Pith and substance test (see also ''

R v Morgentaler ''R v Morgentaler'', 9881 SCR 30 was a decision of the Supreme Court of Canada which held that the abortion provision in the ''Criminal Code'' was unconstitutional because it violated women's rights under section 7 of the ''Canadian Charter of R ...

'') *Provincial Inability test *Purpose and form test * Real and Substantial Connection test * Reasonableness Standard
Sheppard Test
* ''Smithers'' test * ''Sparrow'' test * Test for Aboriginal Title * Test for bias
Test for confusion
* Test for detention * Test for exclusion of evidence * Test for the inclusion of hearsay evidence
Test for materiality
*Test for material causation/contribution *Test for new principle of fundamental justice * Test for Infringement of Title * Test for inducement or contributory patent infringement * Tests for paramountcy – Express contradiction test
Frustrate the purpose test
*Test for patent infringement * Test for peace, order, and good government (see also ''

R v Crown Zellerbach Canada Ltd ''R v Crown Zellerbach Canada Ltd'' 9881 S.C.R. 401, is a leading constitutional decision of the Supreme Court of Canada. A deeply-divided Court upheld the validity of the Ocean Dumping Act, now part of the Canadian Environmental Protection Act ...

'') * Void for Vagueness test * ''Waterfield'' Test * Wigmore Test

European Convention on Human Rights

Necessary in a democratic society __NOTOC__ "Necessary in a democratic society" is a test found in Articles 8–11 of the European Convention on Human Rights, which provides that the state may impose restrictions of these rights only if such restrictions are "necessary in a democra ...

United Kingdom

Bolam test ''Bolam v Friern Hospital Management Committee'' 9571 WLR 582 is an English tort law case that lays down the typical rule for assessing the appropriate standard of reasonable care in negligence cases involving skilled professionals such as doctor ...

Hicklin test The Hicklin test is a legal test for obscenity established by the English case ''Regina v Hicklin'' (1868). At issue was the statutory interpretation of the word "obscene" in the Obscene Publications Act 1857, which authorized the destruction of ...

* Wednesbury unreasonableness test

United States

* Aguilar-Spinelli test * Calculus of negligence test (Hand rule) * Consumer expectations test *

Daubert standard In United States federal law, the ''Daubert'' standard is a rule of evidence regarding the admissibility of expert witness testimony. A party may raise a ''Daubert'' motion, a special motion ''in limine'' raised before or during trial, to exclude ...

Frye test The ''Frye'' standard, ''Frye'' test, or general acceptance test is a test used in United States courts to determine the admissibility of scientific evidence. It provides that expert opinion based on a scientific technique is admissible only when ...

* Imminent lawless action *

Lemon test ''Lemon v. Kurtzman'', 403 U.S. 602 (1971), was a case argued before the Supreme Court of the United States.. The court ruled in an 8–0 decision that Pennsylvania's Nonpublic Elementary and Secondary Education Act (represented through David Kurtz ...

Miller test The Miller test, also called the three-prong obscenity test, is the United States Supreme Court's test for determining whether speech or expression can be labeled obscene, in which case it is not protected by the First Amendment to the United St ...

* Mt. Healthy test * Risk-utility test * SLAPS test (an element of the Miller test) *

Reasonable expectation of privacy Expectation of privacy is a legal test which is crucial in defining the scope of the applicability of the privacy protections of the Fourth Amendment to the United States Constitution. It is related to, but is not the same as, a ''right to privac ...

Clear and present danger ''Clear and Present Danger'' is a political thriller novel, written by Tom Clancy and published on August 17, 1989. A sequel to '' The Cardinal of the Kremlin'' (1988), main character Jack Ryan becomes acting Deputy Director of Intelligence in ...

Bad tendency In U.S. law, the bad tendency principle was a test that permitted restriction of freedom of speech by government if it is believed that a form of speech has a sole tendency to incite or cause illegal activity. The principle, formulated in '' Patte ...