Skip to main content

Rebuttable presumption

An assumption of fact or law that a court accepts as true unless the opposing party produces sufficient evidence to overcome it. Under the Revised PLD, defect and causation can be presumed in specified circumstances, shifting the burden to the defendant to rebut. (Revised PLD, Articles 10(2), 10(3), 10(4).)

Defined in 3 GAGE programs, which carry 3 distinct definitions of it. The wording above is taught in EU AI Act Implementation Expert.

How each discipline defines it

The same term does different work depending on who is using it. These are the definitions as each program teaches them, unedited.

EU AI Act Implementation Expert

An assumption of fact or law that a court accepts as true unless the opposing party produces sufficient evidence to overcome it. Under the Revised PLD, defect and causation can be presumed in specified circumstances, shifting the burden to the defendant to rebut. (Revised PLD, Articles 10(2), 10(3), 10(4).)

Certified AI Governance Professional (CAIGP)

A legal presumption that holds unless contrary evidence overturns it. The Article 40 presumption of conformity is rebuttable: conforming to a harmonised standard makes you presumed compliant, but a regulator can still show, on the facts, that you did not actually meet the requirement.

The AI Lobbyist: Certified AI Policy Strategist

a legal assumption that a court will accept as true unless the opposing party presents evidence disproving it.

Where it is taught

The exact lessons this term appears in. The first 7 topics of every program are free with a free account.

Terms it appears with

Not an alphabetical neighbourhood: these are the terms taught in the same lessons, ranked by how often they appear together.