Section 23 - Applying presumptions in jury trials

In a criminal action tried by jury,

(a) the Court shall not direct the jury to find a presumed fact against the accused if that fact is essential to guilt unless on the totality of the evidence a reasonable mind could not have a reasonable doubt as to the existence of the basic facts that give rise to the presumption, or as to the existence of the presumed fact;

(b) where the presumed fact is essential to guilt, the Court may submit the question of the existence of the presumed fact to the jury, if, on the totality of the evidence a reasonable mind could find both the existence of the basic facts that give rise to the presumption and the existence of the presumed fact beyond a reasonable doubt;

(c) where the presumed fact is not essential to guilt, the question of the existence of the presumed fact may be submitted to the jury if the basic facts that give rise to the presumption are established or otherwise supported by evidence sufficient to meet the burden of producing evidence;

(d) where the jury is asked to determine the existence of a presumed fact against the accused where that fact is essential to guilt, the Court shall instruct the jury to find against the existence of the presumed fact unless they find beyond a reasonable doubt

(i) the existence of the basic facts that give rise to the presumption, and

(ii) the existence of the presumed fact.