Evidence: Rule 129 — What Need Not Be Proved
Revised Rules on Evidence
Rule 129 — What Need Not Be Proved
Section 1. Judicial Notice, When Mandatory.
A court shall take judicial notice,
without the introduction of evidence,
of the existence and territorial extent of states,
their political history,
forms of government and
symbols of nationality,
the law of nations,
the admiralty and maritime courts of the world and their seals,
the political constitution and history of the Philippines,
official acts of the legislative, executive and judicial departments of the National Government of the Philippines,
the laws of nature,
the measure of time, and
the geographical divisions.
1.1 Judicial Notice
Judicial notice is the cognizance of certain facts which judges may properly take and act on without proof because they already know them.
It is referred to as a court’s acceptance for purposes of convenience and without requiring a party’s proof, of a well-known and indisputable fact; the court's power to accept such a fact.
1.2 Concept of Judicial Notice
In the case of Lopez v. Sandiganbayan, G.R. No. 103911, October 13. 1995, the Supreme Court said that, by common sense, tradition and the law the Judge in trying a case sees only with judicial eyes as he ought to know nothing about the facts of the case, except those which have been adduced judicially in evidence. Thus, when the case is up for trial, the judicial head is empty as to facts involved and it is incumbent upon the litigants to the action to establish by evidence the facts upon which they rely.
Section 1, Rule 129. of the Revised Rules of Court, however, provides that certain facts need not be proved because they are judicially noticed by the Courts.
Judicial notice takes the place of proof and is equally as persuasive as actual evidence presented, whether testimonial or documentary.
It signifies that there are certain “facta probanda,” or propositions in a party's case as to which he will not be required to offer evidence: these will be taken for true by the tribunal without the need of evidence.
Judicial notice, however, is a phrase sometimes used in a loose way to cover some other Judicial action.
Put differently, it is the assumption by a court of a fact without need of further traditional evidentiary support.
The principle is based on convenience and expediency in securing and introducing evidence on matters which are not ordinaril) capable of dispute and are not bona fide disputed.
Under the Rules of Court, judicial notice may either be mandatory or discretionary.
With respect to other matters not falling within the mandatory or discretionary judicial notice, the court can take judicial notice of a fact pursuant to the procedure when hearing is necessary.
1.3 Judicial Notice in Mandatory
A court shall take judicial notice, without the introduction of evidence. of the following: EP-FSLA-PO-LMG
Existence and territorial extent of states,
Political history of states,
Forms of government and
Symbols of nationality,
Law of nations,
Admiralty and maritime courts of the world and their seals,
Political constitution and history of the Philippines,
Official acts of the legislative, executive and judicial departments of the National Government of the Philippines,
Laws of nature,
Measure of time, and
Geographical divisions
Law of Nations
As enunciated under Section 2, Article II of the 1987 Philippine Constitution, we adopt the generally accepted principles of international law as part of the law of the land.
However, a difference must be made to foreign laws.
Foreign laws are not a matter of judicial notice.
It is well-settled that our courts do not take judicial notice of foreign laws and judgments; hence, foreign judgments must be alleged and proven according to our law on evidence.
To have evidentiary weight in a judicial proceeding, the foreign laws should be alleged and proved like any other material fact.
Otherwise, under the doctrine of processual presumption, foreign law shall be presumed to be the same as domestic law.
Official acts of the legislative, executive and judicial departments of the National Government of the Philippines
The Senate Report, an official act of the legislative department may be taken judicial notice of.
The courts of the Philippines are bound to take judicial notice of the existence of the diplomatic relations between our country and Japan.
Diplomatic relations form part of the official acts of the Executive Department of our Government.
They are also matters of public knowledge.
❌ Ordinances are not included in the enumeration of matters covered by mandatory judicial notice.
Even where there is a statute that requires a court to take judicial notice of municipal ordinances, a court is not required to take judicial notice of ordinances that are not before it and to which it does not have access.
The party asking the court to take judicial notice is obligated to supply the court with the full text of the rules the party desires it to have notice of.
Counsel should take the initiative in requesting that a trial court take judicial notice of an ordinance even where a statute requires courts to take judicial notice of local ordinances.
Laws of nature
Laws of nature involve the physical sciences, specifically biology, include the structural makeup and composition of living things such as human beings.
Measure of time
Article 13 of the New Civil Code provides that:
when the laws speak of years, months, days or nights, it shall be understood that
years are of three hundred sixty-five days each;
months, of thirty days;
days, of twenty-four hours; and
nights from sunset to sunrise.
If months are designated by their name, they shall be computed by the number of days which they respectively have.
In computing a period, the first day shall be excluded, and the last day included.
Section 1, Rule 22 states that in computing any period of time prescribed or allowed by these Rules, or by order of the court, or by any applicable statute, the day of the act or event from which the designated period of time begins to run is to be excluded and the date of performance included.
Example:
If the last day of the period, as thus computed, falls on a Saturday, a Sunday, or a legal holiday in the place where the court sits, the time shall not run until the next working day.
Geographical divisions
The cases holding that courts may take judicial notice of the fact that certain towns are within the limits of the jurisdiction of the courts are almost innumerable.
Cities and municipalities are created by public law.
Their limits are also prescribed by public law.
The streets are laid out, surveyed and established by virtue of public authority.
Apart from the foregoing enumeration, the court shall take judicial notice of the certified copy of each rule duly filed or as published in the bulletin or the codified rules with the University of the Philippines Law Center.
Section 2. Judicial Notice, When Discretionary.
A court may take judicial notice of matters
which are of public knowledge,
or are capable of unquestionable demonstration,
or ought to be known to judges
because of their judicial functions.
2.1 Judicial Discretion
Based on what is fair under the circumstances and guided by the rules and principles of law; a court's power to act or not act when a litigant is not entitled to demand the act as a matter of right.
The doctrine of judicial notice rests on the wisdom and discretion of the courts.
The power to take judicial notice is to be exercised by courts with caution; care must be taken that the requisite notoriety exists; and every reasonable doubt on the subject should be promptly resolved in the negative.
The principal guide in determining what facts may be assumed to be judicially known is that of notoriety.
Hence, it can be said that judicial notice is limited to facts evidenced by public records and facts of general notoriety.
2.2 Judicial Notice Discretionary
Matters of judicial notice have three material requisites: CWW
the matter must be one of common and general knowledge;
it must be well and authoritatively settled and not doubtful or uncertain; and
it must be known to be within the limits of the jurisdiction of the court.
Judicial notice is discretionary on the following matters:
Public knowledge
✅ It is a matter of public knowledge, of which the court may take judicial notice, that there are towns, at least in some of the provinces, which are so isolated that it takes days and even weeks of travel for those who reside in such towns to reach the provincial capital.
There are facts, indeed, of which courts should take judicial cognizance.
These facts refer to a variety of subjects — legislative, political, historical, geographical, commercial, scientific, and artificial-in addition to a wide range of matters, arising in the ordinary course of nature or the general current of human events.
The matter of judicial notice is ever expanding and will surely keep pace with the advance of the sciences and the arts.
But, a matter to be judicially cognizable must be well-established or authoritatively settled, or of common or general knowledge.
To say that a court will take judicial notice of a fact is merely another way of saying that the usual form of evidence will be dispensed with if knowledge of the fact can be otherwise acquired.
This is because the court assumes that the matter is so notorious that it will not be disputed.
But judicial notice is not judicial knowledge.
The mere personal knowledge of the judge is not the judicial knowledge of the court, and he is not authorized to make his individual knowledge of a fact, not generally or professionally known, the basis of his action.
Judicial cognizance is taken only of those matters which are commonly known.
Facts of common knowledge in the context of judicial notice has been explained as those facts that are “so commonly known in the community as to make it unprofitable to require proof, and so certainly known to as to make it indisputable among reasonable men.”
Things of "common knowledge," of which courts take judicial notice, may be matters coming to the knowledge of men generally in the course of the ordinary experiences of life, or they may be matters which are generally accepted by mankind as true and are capable of ready and unquestioned demonstration.
Thus, facts which are universally known, and which may be found in encyclopedias, dictionaries or other publications, are judicially noticed, provided they are of such universal notoriety and so generally understood that they may be regarded as forming part of the common knowledge of every person.
✅ The Supreme Court takes judicial notice that the use of tricycles to transport heavy objects such as appliances and furniture is a common practice in the Philippines, particularly in rural areas, as tricycles are readily available and a more affordable way of transporting items, especially for those who cannot afford to rent a truck or jeepney.
❌ The article in the website patently lacks a requisite for it to be of judicial notice to the court because such article is not well and authoritatively settled and is doubtful or uncertain.
It must be remembered that some articles appearing in the internet or on websites are easily edited and their sources are unverifiable, thus, sole reliance on those articles is greatly discouraged.
Courts should be permitted to give a liberal interpretation to the law permitting them to take judicial notice of the facts of public knowledge, especially if a technical interpretation would have the effect of defeating the very purpose and object of the law.
Capable of unquestionable demonstration
Matters which are capable of unquestionable demonstration pertain to fields of professional and scientific knowledge.
Facts which are universally known, and which may be found in encyclopedias, dictionaries or other publications, are judicially noticed, provided, they are of such universal notoriety and so generally understood that they may be regarded as forming part of the common knowledge of every person.
As the common knowledge of man ranges far and wide, a wide variety of particular facts have been judicially noticed as being matters of common constructive knowledge.
❌ But a court cannot take judicial notice of any fact which, in part, is dependent on the existence or non-existence of a fact of which the court has no knowledge.
Ought to be known to judges because of their judicial functions
As to matters which ought to be known to judges because of their judicial functions, an example would be facts which are ascertainable from the record of court proceedings, e.g. as to when court notices were received by a party.
Section 3. Judicial Notice, When Hearing Necessary.
During the pre-trial and the trial,
the court, motu proprio or upon motion,
shall hear the parties on the propriety
of taking judicial notice of any matter.
Before judgment or on appeal,
the court, motu proprio or upon motion,
may take judicial notice of any matter
and shall hear the parties thereon
if such matter is decisive of a material issue in the case.
3.1 Hearing is Necessary in a Judicial Notice
With respect to other matters not falling within the mandatory or discretionary judicial notice, the court can take judicial notice of a fact pursuant to the following:
During the pre-trial and the trial,
the court, motu proprio or upon motion, shall hear the parties on the propriety of taking judicial notice of any matter.
Before judgment or on appeal,
the court, motu proprio or upon motion, may take judicial notice of any matter and shall hear the parties thereon if such matter is decisive of a material issue in the case.
General Rule:
Courts are not authorized to take judicial notice of the contents of the records of other cases, even when such cases have been tried or are pending in the same court, and notwithstanding the fact that both cases may have been tried or are actually pending before the same judge.
Exception:
ln the absence of objection and as a matter of convenience to all parties, a court may properly treat all or any part of the original record of the case filed in its archives as read into the records of a case pending before it, when with the knowledge of the opposing party, reference is made to it, by name and number or in some other manner by which it is sufficiently designated.
Thus, for said exception to apply, the party concerned must be given an opportunity to object before the court could take judicial notice of any record pertaining to other cases pending before it.
On the other hand, a court will take judicial notice of its own acts and records in the same case, of facts established in prior proceedings in the same case, of the authenticity of its own records of another case between the same parties, of the files of related cases in the same court, and of public records on file in the same court.
People v. Tundag, G.R. No. 135695-96, October 12. 2000:
❌ The Supreme Court held that the judicial notice of the age of the victim is improper, despite the defense counsel's admission thereof, acceding to the prosecution's motion.
As required by Section 3 of Rule 129, as to any other matters such as age, a hearing is required before courts can take judicial notice of such fact.
Generally, the age of the victim may be proven by the birth or baptismal certificate of the victim, or in the absence thereof, upon showing that said documents were lost or destroyed, by other documentary or oral evidence sufficient for the purpose.
Land Bank of the Philippines v. Honeycomb Farms Corporation:
❌ The Supreme Court categorically ruled that the parties must be given the opportunity to present evidence on the nature of the property before the court a quo can take judicial notice of the commercial nature of a portion of the subject landholding.
Section 4. Judicial Admissions.
An admission, oral or written,
made by the party
in the course of the proceedings
in the same case,
does not require proof.
The admission may be contradicted
only by showing
that it was made through palpable mistake
or that the imputed admission was not, in fact, made.
4.1 Judicial Admission
Judicial admission is an admission, oral or written, made by the party in the course of the proceedings in the same case, does not require proof.
It is an admission made in the course of the proceeding in the same case, verbal or written, by a party accepting for the purposes of the suit the truth of some alleged fact, which said party cannot thereafter disprove
A statement will qualify as a judicial admission if it constitutes a “deliberate, clear and unequivocal” statement, made in the course of judicial proceedings.
A party may make judicial admissions in:
the pleadings,
during the trial, either by verbal or written manifestations or stipulations, or
in other stages of the judicial proceeding.
4.2 How Judicial Admission may be Contradicted
A party who judicially admits a fact cannot later challenge that fact as judicial admissions are a waiver of proof; production of evidence is dispensed with.
A judicial admission also removes an admitted fact from the field of controversy.
An admission made in the pleadings cannot be controverted by the party making such admission and are conclusive as to such party, and all proofs to the contrary or inconsistent therewith should be ignored, whether objection is interposed by the party or not.
The allegations, statements or admissions contained in a pleading are conclusive as against the pleader.
A party cannot subsequently take a position contrary to or inconsistent with what was pleaded.
A judicial admission is a waiver of proof, and production of evidence is dispensed with.
It removes an admitted fact from the field of controversy.
To contradict one's own admission, the Rules require that the party who made the admission must show:
that it was made through palpable mistake or
that the imputed admission was not, in fact, made.
Judicial admissions are legally binding on the party making the admissions.
Correspondingly, facts alleged in the complaint are deemed admissions of the plaintiff and binding upon him.
The allegations, statements or admissions contained in a pleading are conclusive as against the pleader.
A party cannot subsequently take a position contrary to or inconsistent with his pleading.
4.3 Admission Made During the Pre-Trial Conference
In civil cases
Section 1, Rule 18 provides that pre-trial is mandatory.
One of the purposes of which is the possibility of obtaining stipulations or admissions of facts and of documents to avoid unnecessary proof.
The contents of the pre-trial order shall control the subsequent proceedings, unless modified before trial to prevent manifest injustice.
In criminal cases
All agreements or admissions made or entered during the pre-trial conference shall be:
reduced in writing and
signed by the accused and counsel.
Otherwise, they cannot be used against the accused.
The agreements covering the matters in pre-trial:
plea bargaining;
stipulation of facts
marking for identification of evidence of the parties;
waiver of objection to admissibility of evidence;
modification of the order of trial if the accused admits the charge but interpose a lawful defense; and
such other matters as will promote a fair and expeditious trial of the criminal and civil aspects of the case, shall be approved by the court.
The court's approval is not needed to make the stipulations binding on the parties.
Such approval is necessary merely to emphasize the supervision by the court over the case and to enable it to control the flow of the proceedings.
Once the stipulations are reduced into writing and signed by the parties and their counsels, they become binding on the parties who made them.
They become judicial admissions of the fact or facts stipulated.
Even if placed at a disadvantageous position, a party may not be allowed to rescind them unilaterally; it must assume the consequences of the disadvantage.
If the accused are allowed to plead guilty under appropriate circumstances, by parity of reasoning, they should likewise be allowed to enter into a fair and true pretrial agreement under appropriate circumstances.
People v. Guzman y Bocbosila:
❌ The Supreme Court denied the substitution of witnesses since Section 4, Rule 118 of the Revised Rules on Criminal Procedure mandates that the matters agreed upon in the pre-trial conference and as stated in the pre-trial order shall bind the parties.
Comments
Post a Comment