Examples of legal presumptions: A legal presumption is a conclusion based on a specific set of facts, combined with established laws, logic or reasoning. It is a rule of law that allows a court to assume that a fact is true until it is refuted by the greatest consecration (preponderance) of the evidence against it. Legal presumptions are of two types: first, as made by the law itself, or presumptions of simple law; second, how to do them by a jury, or presumptions of law and fact. There are two types of conjectures: refutable conjectures and conclusive conjectures. A rebuttable presumption is presumed to be true until a person proves otherwise (for example. B the presumption of innocence). On the other hand, a conclusive (or irrefutable) presumption can in no way be rebutted (e.B the defence of children in certain legal systems). A rebuttable presumption is a presumption that can be rebutted by evidence to the contrary. The FEDERAL RULES OF EVIDENCE and most state rules deal only with rebuttable assumptions, not conclusive assumptions. The distinction between a presumption of law and a presumption of fact is found in Volume 9, Ency. of evidence, 882, defined as follows: Presumptions of law and fact are artificial presumptions that are recognized by law as the conclusions to be drawn by jurors in certain circumstances; For example, the unrestricted refusal to deliver the goods at the request of the owner does not fall within a definition of a transformation, but since the restriction is accompanied by all the evils of a conversion to the owner, the law makes them equal in their effects and consequences to a transformation by ordering or advising the jury to draw a transformation of the facts of the claim and rejection.

We should admit that the new law does little or nothing to mitigate such a situation. For example, in comparing the two concepts, one court concluded that ”constructive communication” is a legal presumption that makes it impossible to dismiss the issue of disclosure, while ”implied disclosure” is a presumption of fact that relates to what can be learned through reasonable investigation and results from the actual disclosure of the circumstances. and not through constructive communication. Charles v. Roxana Petroleum Corporation, C.C.A.Okl., 282 F. 983, 988. Presumptions of simple law are either absolute or conclusive; such as, for example, the legal presumption that an obligation or other speciality has been performed for consideration cannot be rebutted by evidence until the instrument is accused of fraud or is absolute and can be rebutted; For example, the law assumes that a bill of exchange has been accepted in return, but this presumption can be rebutted by proving otherwise. In evidentiary law, in certain situations, a presumption of a particular fact may be made without proof. The invocation of a presumption shifts the burden of proof from one party to the other in court proceedings.

These assumptions can be refuted by evidence, such as: An example of presumption without fundamental facts is the presumption of innocence. [1] There are a number of hypotheses in most common law jurisdictions. Examples of these hypotheses: The same concept was found in ancient Roman law, where, for example, if there were doubts as to whether a child was really the problem of someone who had left money in a will, the presumption was in favor of the child. [3] Medieval Roman law and canon law downgraded presumptions by force: light, medium or probable and violent. [4] These classifications and many individual conjectures were incorporated into English law by Edward Coke in the seventeenth century. [5] Assumptions are sometimes divided into two types: assumptions without basic facts and assumptions with basic facts. In the United States, mandatory presumptions in criminal cases are inadmissible, but admissible presumptions are allowed. Natural assumptions depend on their own form and effectiveness in generating faith or conviction in the mind, as derived from these contexts indicated by experience; they are completely independent of any artificial context and relationship and differ in this essential respect from mere legal presumptions that they depend on the particular legal system to which they belong, or rather are a branch of it; But simple natural assumptions are completely derived from the common experience of humanity, the course of nature, and the ordinary habits of society. .