good afternoon everyone welcome to this lecture series on the news and evidence this afternoon we will discuss judicial notice let me share my screen okay rule one two nine when you say judicial notice class this refers to facts which does not or facts which do not need to be proven in court so what are facts that need not be proven in court number one those which the courts may take judicial notice two those are judicially admitted three those that are conclusively presumed and for those that are disputably presumed but uncontradicted so plus in these four enumerations the court will no longer be admitting evidence to prove the same because they need not be proved no the court will take judicial notice they're off so what is a judicial notice judicial notice is the cognizance of certain facts which judges may properly take and act upon without proof because they are supposed to be known to them it is based on considerations of expediency and convenience and it displaces evidence being equivalent to proof so class when you say judicial notice this refers to certain facts which the judges must know or ought to know by reason of expediency and convenience which is why class when you say judicial notice this is something which the judges will automatically take note of and the party need not prove them in court now judicial notice relieves the parties from necessity of introducing evidence to prove the fact notified and it makes evidence unnecessary now what are the requisites of a judicial notice one the matter must be one of common and general knowledge two it must be well and authoritatively settled and not doubtful or uncertain third it must be one which is not subject to a reasonable dispute in that it is either generally known within the territorial jurisdiction of the trial court or it is capable of accurately and ready determination by resorting to sources whose accuracy cannot be reasonably be questionable so the requisites of the judicial notice the principle guide in determining what facts may be assumed to be judicially known as that of notoriety when you say notoriety class this is public knowledge the test of notoriety is whether the fact involved is so notorious notoriously known as to make it proper to assume its existence without proof now cluster are two kinds of judicial notice one is mandatory notice and the other is discretionary notice when you say mandatory notice this is the kind of judicial notice which the court will always take judicial notice of so what are they judicial notice is mandatory if the facts are number one existence and territorial extent of states political history forms of government and symbols of nationality law of nations admiralty and maritime courts of the world and their seals political cons constitution and history of the philippines official acts of legislative executive and judicial departments of the philippines laws of nature measure of time and geographical divisions so if the question being determined or the issue raised in a trial proceeding pertains for example to territorial jurisdiction or for example the form of government of the philippines or what is the constitution provides or the geographical divisions of the philippines you don't need to present evidence on this matter because these are part of mandatory notice of the court meaning the court will always and always take notice of these facts now what about discretionary notice discretionary a court may take judicial notice of matters which are of public knowledge capable of unquestionable demonstration or ought to be known to judges because of their judicial functions so you will notice in discretionary notice these are facts which the judge may validly refuse to take notice of for example uh it is very hard to determine some facts which are of public knowledge because there is no instrument by which you can quantify how a certain information or knowledge can be of public scale so if the matter or fact to be proven or established in court is of public knowledge then the court will have the discretion of whether to take notice or to take note of or not and also if the information pertains to unquestionable the demonstration or the facts pertains to those matters but to be known to judges because of their functions then the court may validly refuse to take notice now what when you say common knowledge these are considered as those coming or comprising of those coming to knowledge of men generally in the course of ordinary experiences of life or they may be matters which are generally accepted by mankind as true and capable of ready and unquestioned demonstration so thus facts which are universally known and which may be found in encyclopedias dictionaries and other publications are judicially noticed provided that there are there are of such universal notoriety and so generally understood that they may be regarded as forming part of the common knowledge of every person now uh discretionary judicial notice can be taken off during trial or after trial but before judgment or on appeal so the requirement if the court will take judicial notice of a discretionary matter during trial when the court on its own initiative or on request of a party may announce its intention to take judicial notice of any matter and allow the parties to be heard thereof so you have to take note that the court can automatically or without a motion take a judicial notice as long as the parties are allowed to be heard thereon now when it comes to discretionary judicial notice after trial but before judgment or on appeal there is pre there is pretty much the same requirement the proper court on its own initiative or on requests of a party may take judicial notice of any matter and allow the parties to be heard thereon if such matter is decisive of a material issue in the case so the parties will still be allowed to be heard on whether the court can take discretionary judicial notice of a certain information the only qualification if discretionary judicial notice may be taken off after trial before appeal sorry after trial but before judgment or on appeal is that the matter in which the court will take discretionary judicial notice pertains to a decisive material issue in the case now so we're done with judicial notice let us go to judicial admissions it is an admission whether verbal or written made by a party in the course of the proceedings in the same case which does not require proof what are the elements of judicial admissions surplus judicial admissions is what are the elements of judicial admissions one it must be made by a party to the case or his counsel so it could either be written or uttered by the party himself or his counsel second it must be made in the course of the proceedings in the same case and third it can be verbal or written admission there is no particular form required now let us compare between judicial admission and extrajudicial admission by the way class if a party has made a judicial admission whether verbal or written that admission does not need to be proven anymore by the opposing party since it is an admission by the party or his counsel himself it need not be proven in court now judicial admission refers to those made in the course of the proceedings in the same case extrajudicial admission on the other hand is those made out of court or if made in a court but it is in a different or other proceeding other than the one under consideration judicial admission do not or does not require proof and may be contradicted only by showing that it was made through palpable mistake or that no such admission was made on the other hand in extrajudicial admission it is regarded as evidence and must be offered as such otherwise the court will not consider it in deciding the case judicial admission class is conclusive upon the matter while extrajudicial admission is rebuttable when you say reputable contrary or countervailing evidence can be presented to prove otherwise now judicial admissions need not be offered in evidence since it is not evidence it is superior as a matter of fact to evidence and shall be considered by the court as established on the other hand extrajudicial admission refers to requires formal offer for it to be considered by the court class if admission is considered or in the form of extrajudicial admission then you need to offer it you need to offer the evidence before it is considered by the court without formal of without formal offer of evidence this kind of admission may not be considered by the court unlike a judicial admission judicial admission is admissible even if self-serving while extrajudicial admission is not admissible if self-serving now judicial admission is subject to cross-examination while extrajudicial admission there is no opportunity for the opposing party to conduct cross-examination okay judicial admissions may be made by the party himself or by his counsel again in the pleadings filed by the parties judicial admissions okay it could also be done in the course of the trial either by verbal or vital manifestations or stipulations including depositions written interrogatories and requests for admissions or in other stages of the judicial proceedings as in pre-trial now for example what if a party has made a wrongful judicial admission now what if the admission made was erroneous what is the remedy or what are the remedies of a party who gave a judicial admission number one written admission file a motion to withdraw such bleeding or any other written instrument containing such admission third in case of oral admission the console may move for exclusion of such admission so the remedy will depend upon the form of admission in case of written admission you have to file motion to withdraw the pleading or if it is oral admission then you can move for exclusion of such admission now let us go to the rules on admissions made in pleadings as a general rule the facts alleged in the party's pleadings are deemed admissions and are binding upon that party so whatever allegations or defenses you have propounded in your own pleading these are considered as your own admission and and it will bind you now exception is that hypothetical admissions made by party litigant as when a defendant moves to dismiss the case based on lack of jurisdiction or sets up an affirmative defenses so class for example there is a ground to file motion to dismiss or motion to quash the information if a motion to quash the information is filed there are hypothetical admissions when you say hypothetical these facts may not be true as in the case the party will assume us through the allegations in the information for example if you file a motion to wash based on the facts based on the defense that the the um the inform the officer who signed the information has no authority to approve the information filed in court then by filing the motion to quash the party will have to hypothetically admit the assassinations in the information and then uh the accused will have to ask the court to rule on the basis of this hypothetical admission since admission is only hypothetical it will not bind a party now admissions in a pleading which had been withdrawn or superseded by an amended cleaning although filed in the same case are considered as extrajudicial admissions answer or some motion or any other pleadings you have to file motion to withdraw now go back in alone on court and withdrawal now any motion or bleeding then that withdrawn pleading becomes an extra judicial admission the original must be approved by the party who realized they're on by formally offering it in evidence so that is the effect class affidavit to withdraw and if the court will allow that pleading to be withdrawn from the records it will be considered as extra judicial admissions and therefore it can be offered and proven by the opposing party as a matter or as a matter of fact now let us go to admissions made in readings which are not filed with the court if signed by the party litigant himself it is considered as extrajudicial admission while if signed by the council it is not admissible because a council only binds his client with respect to admissions in open court and in pleadings actually filed with the court so these are pleadings which are not fought in court so deep value affidavit or motion at my permanent party extra judicial admission yes council hindi indian extrajudicial admission the representations of a council will only bind his client in open court now when admission is made in opec court okay now class what is self-serving evidence self-serving evidence self-serving rule which prohibits admission of declaration of a witness applies only to extrajudicial admissions if the declaration is made in open court such is raw evidence it is not self-serving it is admissible because the witness may be cross-examined on that matter so class for example and testimonial and witness is that defendant issue later on now that declaration of the witness is self-serving why self-serving because it will be in the furtherance of his intentions or motives it will be favorable to the case of the complainant now if an evidence is self-serving as a general rule it will not be admitted in court however class if the evidence is made during trial in the course of the proceedings then it is not considered as self-service self-serving because the other party has the opportunity to conduct cross-examination against the other party now how do you contradict a judicial admission it can be done through by showing that it was made through a palpable mistake that there is no such admission made or to prevent manifest injustice now let us go to judicial notice of foreign laws judicial notice foreign laws may not be taken judicial notice of and have to be proved like any other fact indian judicial notice of filipinas except when it is well and generally known it was actually actually ruled upon in other cases before it and none of the parties claimed otherwise now with regard to ordinances the municipal trial court the first level courts are required to take judicial notice of the ordinances of the municipality or city wherein they sit now the original trial courts or the second level courts can take judicial notice only when expressly authorized to do so by the statute or in case of on appeal before them and were in the inferior court to judicial notice of an ordinance involved in the same case now appellate courts may also take judicial notice of ordinances that only because the lower courts took judicial notice they're off but because these are facts capable of unquestionable uh demonstration so ends our presentation i'll see you again next meeting thank you