What need not be proved; matters of judicial notice | Judicial Notice and Judicial Admissions (RULE 129) | EVIDENCE

RULE 129 OF THE RULES OF COURT (PHILIPPINES)
“What Need Not Be Proved” – Matters of Judicial Notice and Judicial Admissions

Below is a comprehensive and meticulous discussion of the key provisions, principles, and nuances under Rule 129 of the Rules of Court in the Philippines. The Rule is divided into sections covering (1) judicial notice—both mandatory and discretionary—and (2) judicial admissions.

I. MATTERS OF JUDICIAL NOTICE

A. General Concept of Judicial Notice

  1. Definition
    Judicial notice is the authority of a court to recognize and accept certain facts without requiring the parties to present evidence thereon. Facts that a court takes judicial notice of need not be established by evidence during the trial.

  2. Rationale

    • The doctrine of judicial notice is designed to expedite the resolution of cases by dispensing with the need to prove facts that are already so notorious, well-known, or easily ascertainable that they cannot reasonably be the subject of dispute.
    • This avoids unnecessary presentation of evidence for matters that are either (a) of universal knowledge, (b) common knowledge within the court’s territorial jurisdiction, or (c) readily verifiable by reference to reliable sources.

B. When Judicial Notice is Mandatory (Section 1)

The court shall take judicial notice, without the introduction of evidence, of the following:

  1. The existence and territorial extent of states, their political history, forms of government and symbols of nationality;
    • This includes recognition of a state’s independence, flag, constitution, and major political subdivisions.
  2. The law of nations;
    • General principles of international law, treaties binding upon the Philippines, and rules recognized by the family of nations.
  3. The admiralty and maritime courts of the world and their seals;
    • Recognition of established maritime courts and standard maritime procedures or codes.
  4. The political constitution and history of the Philippines;
    • The Philippine Constitution, its adoption, amendments, and official historical records that are foundational to the current governmental structure.
  5. The official acts of the legislative, executive, and judicial departments of the Philippines;
    • Encompasses Republic Acts, Presidential Proclamations, Executive Orders, rules and regulations promulgated by administrative agencies, decisions of the Supreme Court, etc.
  6. The laws of nature, the measure of time, and the geographical divisions;
    • Basic scientific and natural facts (e.g., laws of gravity), the universally recognized reckoning of time, and established geographic boundaries (e.g., continents, oceans, provinces, cities).

Because these facts are fundamental, well-settled, or recognized by official sources, courts must take judicial notice of them—even if no party raises or proves them.

C. When Judicial Notice is Discretionary (Section 2)

The court may take judicial notice of matters which are:

  1. Of public knowledge;
    • Facts so commonly known within the territorial jurisdiction of the court (e.g., historical events, public holidays, well-known geographical landmarks).
  2. Capable of unquestionable demonstration;
    • Facts verifiable by resort to easily accessible sources of indisputable accuracy, such as an official statistical register, standard references, or recognized scientific data.
  3. Ought to be known to judges because of their judicial functions.
    • Matters relating to the organization of courts, the official status of court personnel, and other procedural or historical facts that the presiding judge could be presumed to know in the ordinary course of judicial duties.

Unlike mandatory judicial notice, discretionary judicial notice typically requires a party to request or the court to initiate recognition. However, the key requirement is that the fact in question must be sufficiently notorious, readily verifiable, or generally recognized to dispense with formal proof.

D. Hearing Before Taking Judicial Notice (Section 3)

Even if a matter falls within the categories for discretionary judicial notice, the court must give the parties an opportunity to be heard on the propriety of taking judicial notice if it so chooses. Specifically:

  1. Court’s Own Initiative

    • When a court intends to take judicial notice on its own, it should inform the parties (ordinarily done through an order or in open court) so that they may be heard on the question of the propriety of the notice or on the tenor of the matter noticed.

  2. Upon Request of a Party

    • If a party requests judicial notice of particular facts, the adverse party must have an opportunity to respond or object and present arguments if they believe the fact is not properly subject to judicial notice.

  3. Purpose

    • Ensuring due process: parties should be notified that certain facts may be deemed proved without need of evidence. They must be accorded the chance to contest either the factual premise or the correctness of taking notice.

II. JUDICIAL ADMISSIONS (Section 4)

A. Concept of Judicial Admissions

A judicial admission is a formal statement—whether by the parties or their counsel in the pleadings, in the course of the trial, or other proceedings in court—acknowledging the existence of certain facts. Once made, a judicial admission generally binds the admitting party and dispenses with the need for further evidence on the admitted fact.

Key Points:

  1. Where and How Made

    • In the pleadings (e.g., complaint, answer, reply).
    • In open court through oral statements, stipulations, or during pre-trial.
    • In depositions (where statements are later adopted in the court proceedings).
    • In written motions or other documents filed before the court.

  2. Effect of Judicial Admission

    • Conclusive upon the party making it, and the fact admitted no longer needs proof.
    • The court and the opposing party are entitled to rely on that admission throughout the case.

  3. Exceptions to Conclusiveness

    • A party may be relieved of a judicial admission if it can show that it was made through palpable mistake or that no such admission was actually intended.
    • Generally, permission from the court (through a motion or a formal request) is necessary to withdraw or amend a judicial admission. The court has discretion to allow withdrawal if doing so would serve the ends of justice and if it will not prejudice the opposing party in an unfair manner.

  4. Distinction from Extrajudicial Admissions

    • An extrajudicial admission (e.g., an out-of-court statement) is not the same as a judicial admission. Extrajudicial admissions must still be offered in evidence and are subject to the rules on evidence (authentication, best evidence, possible hearsay exceptions, etc.).
    • A judicial admission, once made formally in the context of the pleadings or court proceedings, does not need further proof.

B. Judicial Admissions vs. Judicial Notice

  • Judicial Notice involves facts the court recognizes on its own or upon request—typically external facts of common or official knowledge.
  • Judicial Admission arises from a party’s own acknowledgment of a fact within the case.
  • Both operate to excuse the need for proof, but the source and nature differ:
    • Judicial notice concerns external facts or laws the court may or must notice.
    • Judicial admission concerns a party’s express or implied concession regarding the facts of the case.

III. PROCEDURAL CONSIDERATIONS

  1. Invocation and Objections

    • For mandatory judicial notice, the court automatically applies it; a party need only point it out if it appears the court has overlooked the matter.
    • For discretionary judicial notice, a formal request or motion may be filed by a party. Another party may object, arguing that the fact is (a) not of common knowledge, (b) not readily verifiable, or (c) not within the scope of judicial knowledge.
    • For judicial admissions, once made, they are binding unless successfully withdrawn. Parties should carefully word their pleadings and statements to avoid unintended admissions.

  2. Pre-trial and Judicial Admissions

    • During pre-trial, the parties are encouraged to stipulate on facts not in dispute. Stipulations in pre-trial are treated similarly to judicial admissions—once embodied in the pre-trial order, they are binding unless modified in exceptional cases.
    • This expedites the trial, as only disputed facts remain for litigation.

  3. Appeal and Judicial Notice

    • An appellate court, under certain circumstances, may take judicial notice of matters (discretionary or mandatory) even if the trial court did not.
    • However, new matters cannot generally be raised for the first time on appeal unless they are the type of facts properly subject to judicial notice.

  4. Effect on Burden of Proof

    • Once a fact is judicially noticed or judicially admitted, no evidence is required from the proponent regarding that fact, effectively removing it from the realm of controversy.
    • The burden shifts accordingly, and the parties need only prove or disprove the remaining material facts that are neither judicially noticed nor judicially admitted.

IV. JURISPRUDENCE

Philippine case law consistently affirms that:

  1. Mandatory Judicial Notice

    • Courts are not at liberty to disregard mandatory subjects of judicial notice. If the matter is within the scope of mandatory notice, the court must acknowledge it without further proof.

  2. Discretionary Judicial Notice

    • Courts have broad discretion, but must ensure that the fact to be noticed is of public knowledge or capable of ready determination, and that due process is observed by giving parties the opportunity to be heard.

  3. Judicial Admissions

    • Courts strictly enforce admissions in pleadings and statements made in the course of judicial proceedings, barring a party from taking an inconsistent position later.
    • A landmark principle: an admission in a pleading cannot ordinarily be contradicted by the party who made such admission unless the court allows an amendment upon showing of mistake, inadvertence, or for any justifiable reason.

  4. Withdrawal or Amendment

    • The Supreme Court has recognized that although judicial admissions are generally conclusive, courts are vested with discretion to permit withdrawal for compelling reasons. This is an extraordinary remedy used sparingly to prevent injustice.

V. PRACTICAL TIPS AND STRATEGIES

  1. For Parties/Practitioners

    • Draft pleadings carefully. Even seemingly offhand statements in an Answer or other pleading may be construed as an admission.
    • Before requesting discretionary judicial notice, ensure that the fact truly meets the standard: (a) widely known within the jurisdiction, or (b) verifiable by reputable, accessible sources.
    • If you anticipate reliance on judicial notice or admissions, state them explicitly in your briefs or motions to streamline the trial.

  2. For Judges

    • Be thorough in ensuring due process when taking discretionary notice.
    • Issue clear orders or statements on which facts are being judicially noticed or admitted so that the parties are fully aware of what remains contested.

  3. For Litigants and Clients

    • Understand that statements made in pleadings, stipulations at pre-trial, or in open court can have binding, irreversible consequences.
    • Communicate closely with counsel to avoid unintended admissions.

VI. SUMMARY

  • Judicial Notice:

    • Mandatory (Section 1): The court must notice certain fundamental and official facts without need of proof.
    • Discretionary (Section 2): The court may notice facts of common knowledge or easy verification, but must give parties an opportunity to be heard (Section 3).

  • Judicial Admissions (Section 4):

    • Conclusive upon the party making the admission.
    • May only be withdrawn with the court’s permission on grounds of palpable mistake or when required by the interests of justice.

Both judicial notice and judicial admissions streamline litigation by removing uncontested or indisputable facts from the realm of evidentiary proof, promoting efficiency, and focusing the trial on genuinely disputed issues.

In essence, Rule 129 of the Rules of Court aims to avoid unnecessary proof of facts that are already certain, either because they are well-known and beyond controversy (judicial notice) or because a party has formally and deliberately acknowledged them (judicial admission). Mastery of these principles significantly aids in efficient case management and litigation strategy in Philippine courts.

Disclaimer: This content is not legal advice and may involve AI assistance. Information may be inaccurate.

Privacy Policy

Terms of Use

Lawyer Login

 
 
Privacy Policy         Terms of Use         Lawyer Login