ABSTRACT
The legal concept of burden of proof is notoriously complex and ambiguous. Various kinds of burdens of proof have been distinguished, such as the burden of persuasion, burden of production and tactical burden of proof, and these notions have been described by different scholars in different ways. They have also been linked in various ways with notions like presumptions, standards of proof, and shifts and distributions of burdens of proof. What adds to the complexity is that different legal systems describe and treat the burden of proof in different ways. For instance, in common law jurisdictions the just-mentioned distinction between three kinds of burden of proof is explicitly made while in civil law systems it usually remains implicit.
