Presumption of ownership
Presumption of ownership is one of the important jurisprudential rules and one of the most common proofs of ownership. In particular, protection of possession becomes more important in the ownership of tangible property, where the maintenance of a title deed is not customary, And violating the right of the possessor and demanding a reason from him, disturbs the economic order and the market of Muslims. There are two criteria in analyzing the basics of tangible property: the first is the majority and the second is the primary nature's requirement of the possessor, but we mentioned the third criterion in the article that is customary recognition. Because although the criterion in the rule of possession is not the majority, it does not necessarily return to the basic requirement of possession but is the criterion of customary recognition. There is disagreement among jurists about the conflict between the rule of possession and confession. According to Article 37 of the Civil Code: if the present occupier admits that the property formerly belonged to the claimant, he cannot urge, in refutation of the other's claim, his own occupation of the property, unless he can prove that the property has been transferred to him according to the correct procedure. The validity of the ownership presumption is lost. Some law professors do not distinguish between confession and other evidence of ownership and believe that proving the legitimacy of the claimant will nullify the effect of the property statute for whatever reason. On the other hand, some others believe that according to the text of this article, the only proof of ownership that can destroy the validity is a confession among all other ownership proofs, in other words, there is a feature in the confession that is not in others. However, we have justified the article in two ways: first, if the possessor confesses to the plaintiff's ownership history, she is responsible for proving the reason until the end (until her possession). The second solution can be deduced from the comparison between Article 37 and 1282 and 1283 of the Civil Code, and it was said that the confession of the possessor is covered by Article 1283 and is considered a complex confession.