Vous êtes sur la page 1sur 13

The Burden of Proof and the

Presumptions
I. The Burden of Proof
The Nature of the Burden of Proof
Justice and common sense demand that one who
asserts something must prove his assertion.

The theory of the burden of proof is an application of


the Latin maxim: Ei incumbit probatio, qui dicit, non
qui negat. It is the duty of the one who alleges to
prove what he says, not of the one who denies it.
The Nature of the Burden of Proof

Pedro Juan
(affirmative)

Pedro alleges that


Juan owes him P100
The Nature of the Burden of Proof
Burden of rebuttal- the duty of either party to the
controversy to present evidences and arguments at
any stage of the case to overthrow the contention of
the opposing side.

The burden of proof always remains on the


affirmative side

The burden of rebuttal shifts from side to side


I. The Burden of Proof
The Burden of Proof and the Counterproposition
Counterproposition- one that is presented by the
negative, adverse to the main proposition.

The negative assumes the burden of proof.


The Burden of Proof and the
Counterproposition

Juan Pedro
(affirmative) (negative)

Juan alleges that


Pedro owes him
P100
I. The Burden of Proof
Burden of Proof in Legal Procedure
In law, the term burden of rebuttal is not used

Burden of proof has 2 distinct meanings:


(1) referring to the duty establishing the issue by such
a quantum of evidence as the law demands in the
case
(2) to the duty of producing evidence at the outset or
at any subsequent stage of the trial, in order to meet
the prima facie case.
I. The Burden of Proof
In legal procedure, the burden of proof always
remains on the affirmative and does not shift to the
negative.

Rebuttal evidence/argument- it is presented by a


party to a controversy to overthrow the opposing
case.
II. The Presumptions

The Theory of the Presumptions


 Presumptions- logical inferences of the truth or
falsity of a point in dispute.
II. The Presumptions
Classes of Presumptions
 Presumptions of Fact
Some courts assert that in its origin, every presumption
is one of the fact and not of law, but that it may, in the
course of time, become of presumption of law, and
even an indisputable one; that its truth may be so
universally accepted as to elevate it to the position of
a maxim of jurisprudence… but so long as it retains its
original character as a presumption of fact, it has
simply the force of an argument.