Section 4

Section 4 is a meta-provision that defines the legal effect of the three types of presumptions used throughout the IEA. Every time the IEA says 'the Court may presume', 'the Court shall presume', or 'is conclusive proof', the legal meaning is determined by Section 4. **Type 1 — 'May presume' (discretionary):** The court has a choice: it may treat the fact as proved (and shift the burden to the other side to disprove it), or it may require formal proof. The court's discretion depends on the circumstances — if the presumed fact is strongly suggested by the evidence, the court will usually invoke the presumption. Example: Section 114 IEA — 'The court may presume the existence of any fact which it thinks likely to have happened.' The court can presume that a letter that was posted was delivered (unless there's evidence it wasn't). **Type 2 — 'Shall presume' (mandatory rebuttable):** The court must treat the fact as proved. No judicial discretion — the presumption is invoked automatically. However, it is rebuttable — the opposing party can adduce evidence to disprove it. Example: Section 118 IEA (now BSA S.111) — the court shall presume that a negotiable instrument was made for consideration. Example: Section 113A IEA (BSA S.111) — the court shall presume that a husband (or relatives) abetted suicide if the wife committed suicide within 7 years of marriage and was subjected to cruelty. **Type 3 — 'Conclusive proof' (irrebuttable):** This is not really a 'presumption' at all — it is a substantive rule of law that treats one fact as the absolute equivalent of another. No evidence is allowed to disprove it, however strong. Example: Section 112 IEA — a child born during a valid marriage or within 280 days after dissolution of marriage is conclusively presumed to be the legitimate child of the husband, provided the husband had access to the wife. The court will not hear DNA evidence to the contrary. This absolute rule protects the child from the stigma of illegitimacy. **Practical importance — burden of proof:** Presumptions are fundamentally about shifting the burden of proof. Once a 'shall presume' is invoked, the party against whom it operates must produce evidence to disprove it — or the court will find against them. Understanding which presumptions apply in a case is often the key to litigation strategy.