Presumption of regularity

The presumption of regularity[1] is a presumption that forms part of the law of evidence of England and Wales.

It is expressed by the maxim of law[2] "omnia praesumuntur rite et solemniter esse acta donec probetur in contrarium",[3] which may be shortened to "omnia praesumuntur rite et solemniter esse acta"[4] or "omnia praesumuntur rite esse acta".[5]

Official actions

Where it has been proved that an "official act" has been done, it will be presumed, until the contrary is proved, that the said act "complied with any necessary formalities" and that the person who did it was "duly appointed".[6][7]

This is a presumption of law.[8]

The following cases are relevant to this presumption:

Business transactions

Where it has been proved that "necessary business transactions" have been carried out, it will be presumed, until the contrary is proved, that the said transactions were carried out in the order (if any) that they are required to be carried out.[9] See Eaglehill Ltd v J Needham (Builders) Ltd [1973] AC 992, HL.

Mechanical contraptions

Where it has been proved that a "mechanical device" is normally in "good working order", it will be presumed, until the contrary is proved, that it was in good working order on any relevant occasion.[10] See Tingle Jacobs & Co v Kennedy [1964] 1 WLR 638, CA

References

  1. For this name, see Cooper, Simon & Murphy, Peter & Beaumont, John. Cases & Materials on Evidence. Fourth Edition. Oxford University Press. 1994. p. 86
  2. Archbold Criminal Pleading, Evidence and Practice, 1999, para 10-5 at p. 1130
  3. For this version, see Archbold Criminal Pleading, Evidence and Practice, 1999, para 10-5 at p. 1130
  4. For this version, see Cooper, Simon & Murphy, Peter & Beaumont, John. Cases & Materials on Evidence. Fourth Edition. Oxford University Press. 1994. p. 86
  5. For this version, seeArchbold Criminal Pleading, Evidence and Practice, 1999, para 10-5 at p. 1130
  6. Cooper, Simon & Murphy, Peter & Beaumont, John. Cases & Materials on Evidence. Fourth Edition. Oxford University Press. 1994. p. 86
  7. Archbold Criminal Pleading, Evidence and Practice, 1999, para 10-5 at p. 1130
  8. Archbold Criminal Pleading, Evidence and Practice, 1999, p. 1130, see heading "B" to paras. 10-4 and 10-5
  9. Cooper, Simon & Murphy, Peter & Beaumont, John. Cases & Materials on Evidence. Fourth Edition. Oxford University Press. 1994. pp. 86 and 91
  10. Cooper, Simon & Murphy, Peter & Beaumont, John. Cases & Materials on Evidence. Fourth Edition. Oxford University Press. 1994. pp. 86 and 90
This article is issued from Wikipedia - version of the Tuesday, January 27, 2015. The text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution/Share Alike but additional terms may apply for the media files.