Rule 131 – Disputable Presumptions

Q. That the ordinary course of business has been followed

 Things happened according to the ordinary course of nature and ordinary habits of life are
disputable presumptions that can only be overcome by clear and preponderant evidence
 In this connection, it is of general knowledge that the banking industry follows the ordinary
working hours of 8am to 5pm. Accordingly, an employee of a bank is expected to work from 8 in
the morning to 5 in the afternoon. (Capitol Wireless vs Balagot)
 A mailed letter is deemed received by the addressee in the ordinary course of mail, still, this is
merely a disputable presumption, subject to controversion, and a direct denial of the receipt
thereof shifts the burden upon the party favored by the presumption to prove that the mailed
letter was indeed received by the addressee. (Republic of the Philippines vs CA and Nielson &
Company)

FF. That the law has been obeyed

 A mere application of the catch-all provision on presumption of innocence. It is presumed that a

person is innocent of a crime or wrong, and consequently, that he violated no law, or that he
acted in accordance with law.
 It is a settled rule in our jurisprudence that if the inculpatory facts and circumstances are capable
of two or more explanations, one of which is consistent with his guilt, then the evidence does
not fulfill the test of moral certainty and is not sufficient to support a conviction. (Heirs of
Gregorio vs CA)
 If compliance with the law is presumed, it should be presumed that the petitioner Manila
Electric Company has complied with the prohibition contained in section 16 of Act No. 3108, not
to adopt any unjust, unreasonable and arbitrary measure or regulation, and that the measure or
regulation which was adopted by it and of which it gave notice to the Public Service Commission,
is just and reasonable. Inasmuch as this presumption exists in favor of the petitioner, the burden
of proof rests with the person claiming that said measure or regulation is unjust, unreasonable
or arbitrary, to show that his allegation is true. (Manila Electric Company vs Public Service
Commission)