Short answer. The burden is on the depositary. Article 1981 of the Civil Code provides that when a sealed deposit is returned with the seal broken, fault on the part of the depositary is presumed. The depositary must disprove fault — the depositor does not have to prove it.

What the law says

When the thing deposited is delivered closed and sealed, the depositary must return it in the same condition, and he shall be liable for damages should the seal or lock be broken through his fault. Fault on the part of the depositary is presumed, unless there is proof to the contrary.

Civil Code, Article 1981 — Sealed Deposits. Read the full provision →

The depositary must return the sealed item intact

Article 1981 of the Civil Code establishes the core duty when a depositor entrusts a closed and sealed item: When the thing deposited is delivered closed and sealed, the depositary must return it in the same condition, and he shall be liable for damages should the seal or lock be broken through his fault. The duty is to preserve not just the contents but the physical integrity of the sealed container — the seal itself is part of what must be returned unchanged. A broken seal on return is a visible sign that something went wrong while the item was in the depositary's custody.

Fault is presumed against the depositary

Article 1981 resolves the burden of proof question directly: Fault on the part of the depositary is presumed, unless there is proof to the contrary. When you receive your sealed box back with the seal broken, you do not have to prove that the depositary broke it. The law presumes it. The burden shifts to the depositary to prove that the seal was not broken through any fault on their part — for example, that the seal broke due to the item's own condition, a natural event, or some other cause not attributable to the depositary. If the depositary cannot produce that proof, they are liable for damages.

What happens to the question of value

When the depositary is at fault for the broken seal, the article also addresses how the value of the deposited thing is determined. If the forcible opening is imputable to the depositary and there is no proof of actual contents, the statement of the depositor shall be accepted, when the forcible opening is imputable to the depositary, should there be no proof to the contrary. Your own account of what the sealed box contained and what it was worth carries legal weight. However, the article also provides that courts may evaluate the credibility of the depositor's statement about value — so an inflated or unsupported claim for value would be subject to scrutiny.

The depositary's continuing duty of secrecy

Article 1981 adds one further obligation regardless of how the seal was broken: When the seal or lock is broken, with or without the depositary's fault, he shall keep the secret of the deposit. Even if the depositary broke the seal by accident, or if it was broken by an external force beyond their control, whatever the depositary learned about the contents of the sealed box must remain confidential. The duty of secrecy is absolute — it applies whether the depositary was at fault or not. Disclosing the contents of the sealed deposit would be a separate breach of the depositary's obligations under Article 1981.

Cases citing this provision

These Supreme Court decisions cite the provision above. We list them so you can read them yourself; the summaries of what each decided are not ours to give.

Related provisions

Note. Statute text quoted on this page is reproduced from the official enactment and is linked to the full provision. The explanation around it is general legal information from Vivas & Nobles Law Office, not legal advice. Whether it applies to your situation depends on facts only a lawyer reviewing them can assess.