When has the word “affidavit” been judicially defined?

The word “affidavit” has its origins in the mid 1500s and comes from the medieval Latin word “affidare,” literally meaning “he has stated on oath.”

The courts of common law countries have considered the legal definition of an affidavit from time to time. This page lists some court cases in which the word “affidavit” has been judicially defined.

United States

AD: Need to transfer money or property owed by you to another person? Click here to use this form to easily transfer your property.

In Farm Bureau Mut. Auto Ins. Co. v. Hammer, 83 F.Supp. 383, 386 (W.D. Virginia), Chief Judge Paul gave the following definition of an affidavit:

“An affidavit is a statement reduced to writing and the truth of which is sworn to before someone who is authorized to administer an oath.”

Although the decision was reversed on other grounds (177 F.2d 793 (4th Cir.1949)) and certiorari was denied (339 U.S. 914, 70 S.Ct. 575, 94 L.Ed. 1339 (1950)) this definition has been quoted with approval in several subsequent cases. These include Pfeil v. Rogers, 757 F.2d 850, 859 (7th Cir. 1985) and Evans v Commonwealth 572 S.E.2d 481 (2002) 39 Va. App. 229.

Other cases in the United States have adopted the definition of affidavit given in Black’s Law Dictionary and other legal dictionaries. Those authorities are noted in this post.

United Kingdom

In the United Kingdom “affidavit” was defined in volume 1 of Mathew Bacon’s A New Abridgement of the Law as “an oath in writing, signed by the party deposing, sworn before, and attested by him who hath authority to administer the same.”

This definition was adopted in the case of R v Phillips (1908) 9 WLR 634; 14 BCR 194; 14 CCC 239.

Canada and Australia

Both Canada and Australia have followed the United Kingdom in citing the definition given by Bacon above with approval, rather than attempting their own form of definition. In Australia this occurred in Fastlink Calling Pty Ltd v Macquarie Telecom Pty Ltd [2008] NSWSC 299 at [16] (Barrett J).

In Canada the relevant authority is R v Nichols [1975] 5 WWR 600 (Wachowich LJSC), albeit that the citation is to R v Phillips (1908) 9 WLR 634; 14 BCR 194; 14 CCC 239 (being the UK case citing Bacon noted above) rather than directly to Bacon.