The reasoning in Rhesa Shipping Co SA v Edmunds [1985] 1 WLR 948 suggests that, without sufficient evidence, we cannot simply assume an explanation by eliminating other possibilities. Applying this to the loss of Malaysia Airlines Flight MH370, we face a similar problem: (i) The aircraft disappeared over the Indian Ocean in 2014, and despite extensive searches, only limited debris has been recovered.(ii) Several theories exist, including mechanical failure, pilot action, hijacking, or some unknown catastrophic event.
However, no single theory has been conclusively proven on the balance of probabilities due to the lack of direct evidence.
Neither is Sherlock Holmes that helpful -“when you have eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable, must be the truth.” A court must find facts based on positive proof, not just elimination.
Following Rhesa Shipping, a court would not be able to determine a definitive cause without clear proof. The mystery of MH370 remains unresolved because, much like the case, the available evidence does not support one theory strongly enough to meet the legal burden of proof.
