Subjective Test vs Objective Test

The subjective test and objective test are two different approaches to determining a person's state of mind or the reasonableness of their actions in specific legal matters. These tests are often applied in various areas of law, including criminal law, tort law, and contract law.

Subjective Test
The subjective test evaluates a person's state of mind, intention, belief, or knowledge at the time of a particular action or event. It focuses on what the person honestly knew, thought, or intended, regardless of whether his belief, intention, or knowledge is reasonable or rational from an objective standpoint.

In a criminal context, the subjective test is used to assess a defendant's specific mental state. For example, to prove the crime of murder, the prosecution need to establish that the defendant intended to cause the victim's death. Imagine that the defendant now claims he was acting in self-defence because he genuinely believed he was in imminent danger. To apply the subjective test, the court would focus on whether the defendant honestly believed he was in danger, regardless of whether that belief was objectively reasonable. If the defendant genuinely believed he was about to be attacked, his subjective belief may be a valid defence, even if a reasonable person might not have felt the same way. In this case, he may be guilty of manslaughter instead of murder unless his intention to kill can be established.

In contract law, the subjective test may be used to determine whether a party had a genuine intention to be bound by a contractual term, when the term is ambiguous and has more than one meaning. Suppose two parties are negotiating a contract, and one party believes that a particular clause means one thing but the other party believes that it means another due to ambiguity of the wording. The subjective test would consider whether the parties genuinely understood the term differently. If a party truly believed that the clause meant something different from what the other party understood, it could affect the enforceability of the contract because there was no meeting of the minds, even if his understanding was not objectively reasonable.

The subjective test is an assessment from the perspective of the person in question and can therefore be more lenient and forgiving toward him as he may have acted on his genuine but mistaken belief or emotion, though other people may not do the same in that situation.

Objective Test
The objective test assesses a person's actions or behaviour based on what a reasonable person would have known, thought, or done in the same circumstances. It does not consider the person's actual belief or intention.

In a criminal context, the objective test assesses whether a reasonable person, under the same circumstances as the defendant, would have taken the same action. For example, the force used by the defendant for self-defence must be reasonable. If someone used deadly force to protect himself, the court would evaluate whether a reasonable person would have used the same degree of force in the same situation, regardless of whether the defendant thought that the force he used was reasonable. If a reasonable person would not have used the same degree of force or would have used a lower degree of force in that situation, the self-defence raised by the defendant will fail.

In tort law, the objective test is frequently applied to negligence cases. Suppose a driver fails to stop at a red light and causes a car accident. The court would assess whether a reasonable person, in the same situation, would have stopped at the red light. If so, the driver may be found negligent, even if he honestly believed that he had a valid reason to proceed.

The objective test is an assessment from the perspective of a reasonable person without concerning what the person in question thought, felt and knew. It aims to provide consistency and predictability in legal decision-making by focusing on how a reasonable person would have behaved or thought under the given circumstances.

The choice between a subjective or objective test can significantly impact the legal outcome. The specific test applied depends on the legal context, the nature of the issue, and the relevant laws and precedents. In some legal contexts, both subjective and objective elements can be considered, as in the case of self-defence where the court may examine both the subjective belief and the objective reasonableness of the force used.