Presuming of guilt: notion and meaning in the civil law

The article is devoted to the research of the guilt presuming issues in the civil law. In the work, the doctrinal approaches to defining the notion of the guilt presuming are viewed. The necessity is shown to distinguish between the notion of presumption and the notion of presuming, and their correlation as the generic and the specific notions. It is explained that when the guilt presuming is studied from numerous multi-ordinal positions – as a legal norm, as a supposition, as a regulation method, as a means of regulation, as a legal fact, as a means of interpretation, as the duties of the law enforcer, - the independent value of the guilt presumption is lost as of the highly probabilistic supposition fixed in the legal norm. The realization of the guilt presuming when bringing to the civil liability, should not be identified either with the guilt presumption, nor with the noem-presumption, and should be viewed as the right enforcing guilt presuming. The guilt presuming is the process of fixing the guilt supposition in a legal norm, it is the norm-presumption itself, it is the process of realizing the guilt supposition, including the duty of the court to recognize the supposed fact as a fact in evidence. With the account for the importance and significance of the guilt presuming for the civil legal regulation, and due to the fact that the guilt presuming is a significant feature of the civil law in particular, which differentiates it from the public law branches, the question is raised in the article about the possibility to acknowledge it as a civil law principle.