This document discusses the concepts of burden of proof and presumption. It begins by explaining that presumptions can impose the burden of proof on a party or create a burden that cannot be overcome. It then defines status quo as the existing state of affairs that maintains the way things presently are. There are two forms of presumption: judicial presumption favors maintaining the status quo, while policy presumption is used when change to the status quo is necessary. The document also defines burden of proof as resting on the party that introduces an issue, and they must support their argument. There is also a burden of refutation to respond to opposing arguments.
This document discusses the concepts of burden of proof and presumption. It begins by explaining that presumptions can impose the burden of proof on a party or create a burden that cannot be overcome. It then defines status quo as the existing state of affairs that maintains the way things presently are. There are two forms of presumption: judicial presumption favors maintaining the status quo, while policy presumption is used when change to the status quo is necessary. The document also defines burden of proof as resting on the party that introduces an issue, and they must support their argument. There is also a burden of refutation to respond to opposing arguments.
This document discusses the concepts of burden of proof and presumption. It begins by explaining that presumptions can impose the burden of proof on a party or create a burden that cannot be overcome. It then defines status quo as the existing state of affairs that maintains the way things presently are. There are two forms of presumption: judicial presumption favors maintaining the status quo, while policy presumption is used when change to the status quo is necessary. The document also defines burden of proof as resting on the party that introduces an issue, and they must support their argument. There is also a burden of refutation to respond to opposing arguments.
This document discusses the concepts of burden of proof and presumption. It begins by explaining that presumptions can impose the burden of proof on a party or create a burden that cannot be overcome. It then defines status quo as the existing state of affairs that maintains the way things presently are. There are two forms of presumption: judicial presumption favors maintaining the status quo, while policy presumption is used when change to the status quo is necessary. The document also defines burden of proof as resting on the party that introduces an issue, and they must support their argument. There is also a burden of refutation to respond to opposing arguments.
AND PRESUMPTIONS Prof. Jojo Abad, MPA INTRODUCTION
It is difficult to fully appreciate the significance of the terms
“burden of proof” and “presumption” without first attempting to understand the common ambiguity they have traditionally shared. In common cases, a presumption imposes the burden of proof upon the party against whom presumption is operable. In certain cases however, a presumption creates a burden which legally cannot be overcome. It is the interplay between presumptions and burden of proof which is focus of this study. STATUS QUO • Status quo is a Latin term meaning the existing state of affairs. It is a commonly used form of the original Latin "statu quo" – literally "the state in which". To maintain the status quo is to keep the things the way they presently are. The related phrase "status quo ante", literally "the state in which before", means "the state of affairs that existed previously" PRESUMPTION Presumption is the tendency of favoring one side of an argument over another. There are at least two forms of presumption.
favors the status quo or keeping things they way they are currently. Small changes can be made but the existing structure is not going to be different. • Policy presumption- The policy form of presumption is used when change is necessary to the status quo. BURDEN OF PROOF A burden of proof may rest on either the affirmative or the negative. Whoever introduces an issue into the debate has a burden of proof. The advocate must support the argument he or she introduces.
The theory of the burden of proof is an application of
the Latin maxim: “Ei incumbit probatio, qui dicit, non qui negat.” To present evidences and arguments to establish a claim is called burden of proof. BURDEN OF REFUTATION
Either side may also have a burden of refutation—the
obligation to refute, or respond to, opposing arguments. This burden also referred to as the burden of “clash” rests on the advocate whose case is weakened by an argument advanced by an opponent. END OF PRESENTATION