The so-called reversal of the burden of proof is an exceptional case of "whoever makes the claim must provide evidence." That is to say, someone other than the person making the claim must provide evidence. This situation is relatively rare, but it does not mean that there is no such situation. In infringement cases, there will also be and apply the situation of inversion of the burden of proof.
1. The reversal of the burden of proof in tort cases According to civil law theory, there are four elements that generally constitute a tort case: infringement, damage result, causal relationship and fault. These four items generally require the plaintiff to provide evidence. However, due to the particularity of infringement cases, it is relatively difficult for the claimant to prove certain infringement constituent facts. The law stipulates that in the following eight types of cases, the defendant shall bear the burden of proof. (1) Patent infringement: If the patent infringement dispute involves an invention patent for a new product manufacturing method, the unit or individual that manufactures the same product shall provide proof that its product manufacturing method is different from the patented method; (2) Highly hazardous operations: highly hazardous substances The possessor, user or manager shall bear the burden of proof for the fact that the victim intentionally caused damage; (3) Environmental pollution: The polluter shall bear the burden of proof for the exemption grounds provided by law and the absence of a causal relationship between his behavior and the damage results; (4) Falling objects from heights: If buildings, structures or other facilities and their placed or suspended objects fall off or fall and cause damage to others, the owner and manager shall bear the burden of proof that they are not at fault; (5) Damage caused by raising animals: The animal breeder or manager bears the burden of proof that the victim is at fault or that a third party is at fault; (6) Defective products: The seller or producer of the product bears the burden of proof for the exemptions stipulated in the law; (7) *** Same as Danger: The infringer bears the burden of proof that there is no causal relationship between the infringement and the damage result; (8) Medical behavior: The medical institution bears the burden of proof that there is no causal relationship and that there is no medical fault.
2. Inversion of the burden of proof in other cases 1. Inversion of the burden of proof in company cases Article 63 of the "Company Law" Shareholders of a one-person limited liability company cannot prove that the company's property is independent of the shareholders themselves If the company owns property, it shall be jointly and severally liable for the company's debts. 2. The burden of proof is reversed in consumer rights cases. According to Article 23, paragraph 3, of the Consumer Rights Protection Law, durable goods such as motor vehicles, computers, televisions, refrigerators, air conditioners, and washing machines provided by operators or For services such as decoration and decoration, if a consumer discovers a defect within six months from the date of receiving the goods or services and a dispute arises, the operator shall bear the burden of proof of the defect. Consumers need to be reminded that this rule only applies to durable goods such as motor vehicles and services such as decoration and decoration, and is limited to six months from the date of purchase or receipt of services. After six months, it no longer applies; others If a product or service is defective, the burden of proof remains on the consumer according to the rules of whoever makes the claim must provide evidence. 3. The burden of proof is reversed in labor law disputes. According to Article 6 of the Labor Dispute Mediation and Arbitration Law, in the event of a labor dispute, the parties concerned have the responsibility to provide evidence for their claims. If the evidence related to the disputed matter is under the control of the employer, the employer shall provide it; if the employer fails to provide it, it shall bear adverse consequences. "Several Provisions of the Supreme People's Court on Evidence in Civil Litigation" Article 6 In labor dispute cases, labor disputes occur due to the employer's decision to fire, remove, dismiss, terminate the labor contract, reduce labor remuneration, calculate the employee's working life, etc. In case of dispute, the employer shall bear the burden of proof. The emergence of the inversion of the burden of proof has greatly improved our country's system of proof, because if there is only a situation of "whoever claims, who will provide evidence", it will lead to incomplete evidence in some aspects, and the emergence of the inversion of the burden of proof has greatly filled the gap in this aspect. . In addition, the reversal of the burden of proof is gradually improving with the development of practice during the application process.