Présomption

In law, a presumption is an "inference of a particular fact". There are two types of presumptions: rebuttable presumptions and irrebuttable (or conclusive) presumptions. A rebuttable presumption will either shift the burden of production (requiring the disadvantaged party to produce some evidence to the contrary) or the burden of proof (requiring the disadvantaged party to show the presumption is wrong); in short, a fact finder can reject a rebuttable presumption based on other evidence. Conversely, a conclusive/irrebuttable presumption cannot be challenged by contradictory facts or evidence. Sometimes, a presumption must be triggered by a predicate fact—that is, the fact must be found before the presumption applies. The ancient Jewish law code, the Talmud, included reasoning from presumptions (hazakah), propositions taken to be true unless there was reason to believe otherwise, such as "One does not ordinarily pay a debt before term." The same concept was found in ancient Roman law, where, for example, if there was doubt as to whether a child was really the issue of someone who had left money in a will, the presumption was in favour of the child. Medieval Roman and canon law graded presumptions according to strength: light, medium or probable, and violent. These gradings and many individual presumptions were taken over into English law in the seventeenth century by Edward Coke. A number of presumptions are found in most common law jurisdictions. Examples of these presumptions include: The presumption of death. A person who has been absent for seven years without explanation and "gone to parts unknown" is presumed dead at common law. The time period it takes for the presumption to arise has often been modified by statute. The presumption of sanity. A person who faces criminal trial is presumed sane until the opposite is proved. Similarly, a person is presumed to have testamentary capacity until there is evidence to undermine that presumption.