In a strict sense, the reversal of the burden of proof refers to judges' deviating from the allocation of the burden of proof established by legislation. The reversal of the burden of proof, in substantive terms, transfers the risk of losing a lawsuit when essential facts are non liquet, and in procedural terms, reshapes the structure of factual trial. Therefore, this is fundamentally distinct from the alleviation of the difficulties of proving. The allocation of the burden of proof established by legislation can be discovered through legal interpretation; however, the reversal of the burden of proof goes beyond the literal boundaries of the law and can only be understood as legal renewal. Therefore,proponents of the reversal of the burden of proof should demonstrate that there are loopholes in the law regarding the allocation of the burden of proof, and these loopholes cannot be resolved through allevi-ating strategies of the difficulties of proving. Nevertheless, in China, both scholars and drafters of ju-dicial interpretation have not met this requirement in their arguments of the reversal of the burden of proof in good faith acquisition. Defining the reversal of the burden of proof as legal renewal and clari-fying its argumentative requirements contribute to emphasizing the normative features of the allocation of the burden of proof and safeguarding the stability of civil substantive law.
Reversal of the Burden of ProofAlleviation of the Difficulties of ProvingLegal RenewalLegal InterpretationGood Faith Acquisition
NETL
NSTL
万方数据
