Presumptions these are inferences of the existence or non-existence of a fact which courts are

permitted to draw from the proof of other facts.

Note: a presumption shifts the burden of going forward with the evidence. It imposes on the party
against whom it is directed the burden of going forward with evidence to meet or rebut the
presumption.
Presumption is mandated by law and establishes a legal relation between or among the facts.
-

Is a deduction directed by law.

Inference it is a factual conclusion that can rationally be drawn from other facts.
-

It is a permissive deduction.

Effect of presumption a party in whose favor the legal presumption exist may rely on and invoke such
legal presumption to establish a fact in issue. One need not introduce evidence to prove the fact for a
presumption is prima facie proof of the fact presumed.
Presumption of law (praesumptiones juris) it is a deduction which the law expressly directs to be made
from particular facts.
-

A certain inference must be made wherever the facts appear which furnish the basis of the
inference.
Reduced to fixed rules and form a part of the system of jurisprudence.
Need not be pleaded or proved if the facts on which they are based are duly averred and
established.

Presumption of fact (praesumptiones hominis)

-

It is a deduction which draws from the facts proved without an express direction from law to
that effect.
Discretion is vested in the tribunal as to drawing the inference.
Derived wholly and directly from the circumstances of the particular case by means of the
common experience of mankind.
Has to be pleaded and proved

Kinds of presumptions of law

1. Conclusive presumptions (presumptions juris et de jure)
2. Disputable presumptions (presumptions juris tantum)
Conclusive presumptions they are those which are irrebuttable upon the presentation of the evidence
and any evidence tending to rebut the presumption is not admissible. This presumption is in reality a
rule of substantive law.
Classes of conclusive presumptions

1. Estoppel in pais (equitable estoppel) whenever a party has, by his own declaration, act or
omission, intentionally and deliberately led another to believe a particular thing to be true, and
to act upon such belief, he cannot, in any litigation arising out of such declaration, act or
omission, be permitted to falsify it ( section 2 (a), rule 1 3 1).
2. Estoppel by deed a party to a property deed is precluded from asserting, as against another
party to the deed, any right or title in derogation of the deed, or from denying the truth of any
material fact asserted in the deed e.g. the tenant is not permitted to deny the title of his
landlord at the time of the commencement of the relation of landlord and tenant between them
(section 2 (b), rule 1 3 1).
Note: estoppel may attach even though the landlord does not have title at the commencement
of the relations. It may inure in favor of the successor. If the title asserted is one that is alleged
to have been acquired subsequent to the commencement of that relation, the presumption will
not apply.
Distinguish estoppel from waiver a waiver is a voluntary and intentional abandonment or
relinquishment of a known right. It must be supported by an agreement founded upon a valid
consideration, an equitable estoppel may arise however, in the absence of any intention on the part of
the person estopped to relinquish or change any existing right, and it need not be supported by any
consideration, agreement, or legal obligation.
Basis of estoppel in pais it is founded upon principles of morality and fair dealing and is, intended to
promote the ends of justice. It always presupposes error on one side and fault or fraud upon the other
and some defect of which it would be equitable for the party against whom the doctrine is asserted to
take advantage.
Effect of estoppel in pais the effect of an estoppel in pais, is to prevent the assertion of what would
otherwise be an unequivocal right or to preclude what would otherwise be a good defense, such
estoppel operates always as a shield, never as a sword.
Requisites of estoppel in pais
1. Conduct amounting to false representation or concealment of material facts; or at least
calculated to convey the impression that the facts are otherwise that, and inconsistent with,
those which the party subsequently attempts to assert;
2. Intent, or at least, expectation, that this conduct shall be acted upon by, or at least influence,
the other party; and
3. Knowledge, actual or constructive, of the real facts.
Requisites for estoppel
1. Lac of knowledge and of the means of knowledge of the truth as to the facts in question;
2. Reliance, in good faith, upon the conduct or statements of the party to be estopped; and
3. Action or inaction based thereon of such character as to change the position or status of the
party claiming the estoppel, to his injury, detriment or prejudice.

Other forms of estoppel akin to estoppel in pais:

1. Estoppel by silence where a person, who by force of circumstances is under a duty to another
to speak. Refrains from doing so and thereby leads the other to believe in the existence of a
state of facts in reliance on which he acts to his prejudice. Silence may support an estoppel
whether the failure to speak is intentional or negligent.
2. Estoppel by laches is unreasonable delay to seek or to enforce a right at a proper time. A
neglect to do something which one should do or to seek to enforce a right at a proper time.
3. Promissory estoppel may arise from the making of a promise, even though without
consideration, if it was intended that the promise should be relied upon and in fact relied upon,
and if refusal to enforce it would be virtually to sanction the perpetration of fraud or would
result in other injustice.
4. Estoppel on question of jurisdiction a party is barred from assailing the legality of an order
issued at his own motion since a person cannot be allowed to take advantage of his own wrong
when such would work substantial injury to the other party.
Estoppel by deed the doctrine is founded in public convenience and policy, because it tends to
encourage honesty and good faith between landlord and tenant.
Requisites of estoppel by deed
1.
2.
3.
4.

The recitals should be clear and unambiguous;

There should be distinct and precise admission of facts;
The deed must be delivered; and
That it must be a valid instrument.

Disputable presumptions those which are satisfactory if uncontradicted, but may be contradicted and
overcome by other evidence (section 3, rule 1 3 1).
Disputable presumptions under section 3 of rule 1 3 1
1. Lack of knowledge and of the means of knowledge of the truth as to the facts in question;
Note: it applies to both civil and criminal cases. Presumption of innocence of the accused
accompanies him until the rendition of judgment and disappears after conviction, such that
upon appeal, the appellate court will then presume the guilt of the accused. The prosecutions
case must rise and fall on its own merits and cannot draw strength from the weakness of the
defense.
2. Unlawful act is done with unlawful intent;
3. Person intends the ordinary consequences of his voluntary act;
4. Person takes ordinary care of his concerns.
Note: GR: all people are sane and normal and moved by substantially the same motives. When of age
and sane, they must take care of themselves. Courts operate not because one person has been defeated

or overcome by another but because that person has been defeated or overcome illegaly. There must
be a violation of the law.
Exception: when one of the parties is unable to read or if the contract is in a language not understood by
him, and mistake or fraud is alleged, the person enforcing the contract must show that the terms
thereof have been fully explained to the former (article 13 22, CC).
5. Evidence willfully suppressed would be adverse if produced.
Requisites:
a. The evidence is material;
b. The party had the opportunity to produce it; and
c. The evidence is available only to the said party.
The presumption will not be applicable when:
a.
b.
c.
d.

6.
7.
8.
9.
10.

Suppression of evidence is not willful;

Evidence suppressed or withheld is merely corroborative or cumulative;
Evidence is at the disposal of both parties; and
Suppression is by virtue of an exercise of privilege.
Note: failure of the prosecution to present a certain witness and to proffer a plausible
explanation does not amount to willful suppression of evidence since the prosecutor has the
discretion/prerogative to determine the witnesses he is going to present.
Money paid by one to another was due to the latter.
Thing delivered by one to another belonged to the latter.
Obligation delivered up to the debtor has been paid.
Prior rents or installments had been paid when a receipt for the later ones is produced.
A person found in possession of a thing taken in the doing of a recent wrongful act is the taker
and doer of the whole act; otherwise, that things which a person possesses or exercises acts of
ownership over, are owned by him.

Note: in order to raise the presumption, the following must be proved:

1. That a crime was committed;
2. That it was committed recently;
3. That the stolen property was found in the possession of the defendant; and that the defendant
is unable to explain his possession satisfactorily.
11. That a person in possession of an order for the payment of the money or delivered the thing
accordingly;
12. Person acting in public office was regularly appointed or elected to it.
Ratio: it would cause great inconvenience if in the first instance strict proof were required of
appointment or election to office in all cases where it might be collaterally in issue.

Note: however, the presumption of a regular appointment does not apply to a public officer seeking to
recover salary attached to the office, or the benefits of a pension system.
13. Official duty has been regularly performed.
Note: all things are presumed to have been done regularly and with due formality until the contrary
is proved (pmnia praesumuntur rite et solemniter esse acta donec probetur in contrarium). This
presumption extends to persons who have been appointed pursuant to a local or special statute to
act in quasi-public or quasi-official capacities and to professionals like lawyers and surgeons.
GR: presumption applies to both civil as well as criminal cases.
Exceptions:
a. Petition for writ of amparo presumption may not be invoked by the respondent public officer
or employee.
b. The presumption does not apply during in-custody investigation.
c. When the official conduct in question is irregular on its face.
14. A court or judge acting as such, whether in the Philippines or elsewhere, was acting in the lawful
exercise of jurisdiction.
Note: lawful exercise of jurisdiction is presumed in all cases, be it superior or inferior courts, whether in
the Philippines or elsewhere, unless the record itself shows that jurisdiction has not been acquired or
the record itself shows the absence of jurisdiction, in which case jurisdiction to render a judgment may
not be presumed.
15. All the matters within an issue raised in a case were laid before the court and passed upon by it;
all matters within an issue in a dispute submitted for arbitration were laid before arbitrators and
passed upon by them.
16. Private transactions have been fair and regular.
17. Ordinary course of business has been followed.
18. There was a sufficient consideration for a contract.
19. Negotiable instrument was given or indorsed for a sufficient consideration.
20. An endorsement of negotiable instrument was made before the instrument was overdue and at
the place where the instrument is dated.
Note: except where an indorsement bears date after the maturity of the instrument, every
negotiation is deemed prima facie to have been effected before the instrument was overdue.
(section 45, Act number 20 31).
21. A writing is truly dated.
22. Letter duly directed and mailed was received in the regular course of the mail.
Note: for this presumption to arise, it must be proved that the letter was properly addressed with
postage pre-paid and that it was actually mailed.
23. Presumption of death

a. Absence of 7 years it being unknown whether or not, the absentee still lives, he shall be
presumed dead for all purposes, except for those of succession.
b. Absence of 10 years the absentee shall be considered dead for the purpose of opening his
succession only after an absence of 10 years; and if he disappeared after the age of 75, 5
years of absence is sufficient.
c. The following shall be considered dead for all purposes including the division of estate
among the heirs 4 years:
aa. person on board a lost vessel or aircraft;
bb. member of armed forces who has taken part in armed hostilities; and a person who has
been in danger of death under the circumstances.
For purposes of contracting subsequent marriage, absence of:
d. 4 years if there has been a well-founded belief that the absent spouse is already dead.
e. 2 years if disappearance is attended with danger of death in the extraordinary
circumstances above.
Before marrying again the spouse present must institute a summary proceeding as provided in
the family code and in the rules for declaration of presumptive death of the absentee, without
prejudice to the effect of reappearance of the absent spouse.
If the conditions above are not present, rule on preponderance of evidence applies to establish
the fact of death. Also, presumption of death must yield to preponderance of evidence of death,
without waiting for the above periods to expire.
For purposes of settlement proceedings, a person is presumed dead if absent and unheard from
for the periods in the ncc. If such person proves to be alive, he is entitled to the balance of the
estate after payment of debt recoverable by motion in the same proceeding rule 73 section 4.
Such presumption can be invoked in an action or a special proceeding, but there can be no
independent action or special proceeding for presumption of death.
24. Acquiescence resulted from a belief that the thing was conformable to law or fact failure to
speak to an accusation of complicity raises presumption of acquiescence in the accusation,
subject to principle of admission by silence.
25. Things have happened according to the ordinary course of nature and the ordinary habits of life.
26. Persons acting as partners have entered the contract of co-partnership.
27. A man and a woman deporting themselves as husband and wife has entered into a contract of
marriage if cohabits; presumed married. Cohabitation and reputation must concur for the
presumption.
28. That property acquired by a man and woman living with each other without benefit of marriage,
but capacitated to marry each other, or under a void marriage, has been obtained by their joint
efforts, work or industry.

29. In cases of cohabitation by a man and woman not capacitated to marry each other, and who
have acquired property through their actual joint contribution, such contribution and their
corresponding, such contribution and their corresponding shares, are equal.
30. Presumption on conception of child rule does not presume legitimacy; presumes only as to
what marriage the child has been conceived.
Child to be of first marriage:
a. Mother remarried within 300 days from termination of first marriage;
b. Child born within the same 300 days;
c. Child born before 180 days from solemnization of 1st marriage.
Child to be of the second marriage:
a. Mother remarried within 300 days;
b. Child born within the same 300 days;
c. Child born after 180 days from the solemnization of 2nd marriage.
Legitimate children:
a.
b.
c.
31.

32.
33.
34.
35.

If conceived and born during marriage;

If conceived before marriage but born during marriage;
If conceived during marriage but born after.
A thing once proved continues to exist as long as is usual with things of that nature
(presumption of continuity of existence)
Example:
a. Presumption of continuity of life;
b. Presumption of xontinuity of mental condition or mental capacity or capacity to act, if not
previously declared incapable. Until the contrary is proven that he is incapacitated or
insane;
c. Presumption of continuity of physical possession;
d. Presumption of continuity of possession during the intervening period;
e. Presumption of continuity of facts. However, presumption cannot prevail over positive
testimony of witness.
That the law has been obeyed.
That a printed or published book, purporting to be printed or published by public authority, was
so printed and published.
That a printed or published book, purporting contain reports of cases adjudged in tribunals of
the country where the book is published, contains correct reports of such cases.
That a trustee or other person whose duty it was to convey real property to a particular person
has actually conveyed it to him when such presumption is necessary to perfect the title of such
person or his successor in interest.
a. It is the duty of trustee to convey;
b. There is sufficient reason to justify the presumption;
c. Object of presumption is to support title; and

d. Case must be clear such that a court, if called upon, would decree a reconveyance.
36. Presumption of survivorship, except for the purpose of succession:
37. In case of doubt in succession, whoever alleges the death of one prior to the other shall prove
the same; in the absence of proof, they shall be considered to have died at the same time.
Section 4. no presumption of legitimacy or illegitimacy
There is no presumption of legitimacy or illegitimacy of a child born after 300 days following the
dissolution of the marriage or the separation of the spouses. Whoever alleges the legitimacy or
illegitimacy of such child must prove his allegation.