THE PRESUMPTION OF LEGALITY AND THE REVERSE OF THE BURDEN OF PROOF IN THE APPLICATION OF TRAFFIC FINES

Abstract

This article aims to demonstrate the divergence between the reversal of the burden of proof resulting from the presumption of legality inserted in the context of the application of traffic fines. To this end, the complex relationship between these two elements is explored, considering the unilaterality of administrative acts and the lack of evidentiary support. This time, the fundamental concept of administrative act is addressed, highlighting its main characteristics, such as imperativeness, discretion, binding and legality itself. Furthermore, the doctrine related to the presumption of legality of administrative acts is examined, focusing on the public administration's prerogative that its acts are presumed legal until proven otherwise, exploring the complexities of the binomial between efficiency and disproportionality. In this context, the concept of diabolical evidence that falls on citizens in an attempt to contest the legality of administrative acts is addressed, leading to the analysis of the inversion of the burden of proof, at a time that collates some judgments and analyzes the theory of dynamic distribution of burden of proof.