The reason given in a promissory note is presumed by law to be valid and legitimate, leaving the burden of proof to anyone claiming otherwise. It is not necessary to state the reason in the body of the promissory note; however, if the reason is stated, it is considered the actual and true reason for issuing the negotiable instrument, and anyone claiming a reason other than that stated in the promissory note has the right to prove it by any means. Nevertheless, writing the reason in the body of the promissory note constitutes an admission that the beneficiary can rely on against its issuer, whether while the note is still considered a commercial instrument or after it has been converted into an ordinary civil instrument. As has been said, an admission is the strongest form of evidence, and the issuer of the promissory note cannot deny the reason without presenting compelling evidence that negates the admission recorded in the note. This evidence must be strong enough to overturn the admission recorded in the note. We will mention here, as an example, what can overturn the admission recorded in the body of the promissory note:
- The beneficiary's acknowledgment that the reason stated in the promissory note is not true or differs from the reality of the situation.
- The stated reason may be contradicted by reality. The court may consider the reason according to the different circumstances.
- If the reason given in the promissory note violates the principle of "self-sufficiency" of the commercial paper, then the commercial paper can be demolished and referred to as a civil paper only. Then the court of the subject matter decides on the issue of the reason and its validity or lack thereof according to the different circumstances, and it is subject to the rules of civil evidence.
Discussing the reason in a promissory note is often for the purpose of addressing the issue of entitlement; for entitlement only exists for a reason. This reason is either unwritten, in which case we assume its existence and legitimacy even if we do not know its true nature, or it is written, in which case we assume we know its true nature. If it is legitimate in itself, we assume the legitimacy of its reason. In the balance of relative justice, we see that the scales tip in favor of writing down the reason over leaving it out. And God is the One who grants success.