Who bears the risk if a letter does not arrive? letters sent by first-class post are now regarded as having arrived within two days of mailing. The Ministry of Justice followed up this change of practice in May 2011 by stating (in Circular Letter No. 9189 of 10 May 2011 to all ministries) that in future, letters should generally be regarded as having arrived within two days of mailing. This was based on information from the postal service about the percentage of letters reaching the addressee within one, two, three and four days of mailing, respectively. The examples of the senior citizen who appealed too late and the sickness ­benefit recipient who failed to attend a job centre interview are both from before the change of practice – i.e. from the time when it was assumed as a starting point that letters sent by first-class post would arrive on the day after mailing. In the case of the senior citizen, it was therefore in accordance with practice when the Social Tribunal regarded the letter sent on 13 November 2007 as ­having arrived on 14 November 2007. It was also in accordance with ordinary practice to regard letters sent by a public authority as having reached the addressee. Apart from the addition of a day for the conveyance by mail, the legal position is still the same. However, not all letters sent by first-class post reach the addressee within two days as presumed by the new practice. This may for instance be due to bad weather, strikes or other circumstances at the postal service or to the abovementioned failure of the authority to hand over the letter to the postal service on the day it is dated. It is also generally accepted that some letters never reach the addressee. Burden of proof resting with the authority The legal starting point is that it is the authority’s responsibility that the letters it sends reach the addressee on time. This implies that the authority has to prove that the letter has been sent and has arrived (on time). The courts have processed a number of cases and have demanded that – to discharge the burden of proof – the authority must for instance –– outline its mailing routines in order to render probable that there are no ­errors in the authority’s mail dispatch and/or –– provide a copy of the letter sent and a file note or a list of mail sent, stating when the letter was sent. 41