RULE 129 – WHAT NEED NOT BE PROVED

Q. What is judicial notice?

ANS: Judicial notice takes the place of proof and is of equal force. It displaces evidence and
fulfills the purpose for which the evidence is designed to fulfill. (EVIDENCE, Riano 2016)

JUDICIAL NOTICE, WHEN MANDATORY

Q. What are matters subject of mandatory judicial notice?

ANS: Matters subject of mandatory judicial notice are:
a. Existence and territorial extent of states;
b. Political history, forms of government, and symbols of nationality of states;
c. Law of nations;
d. Admiralty and maritime courts of the world and their seals;
e. Political constitution and history of the Philippines;
f. Official acts of the legislative, executive, and judicial departments of the Government of
the Philippines;
g. Laws of nature;
h. Measure of time; and
i. Geographical divisions (2019 RULES OF COURT, RULE 129 SEC.1)

Q. When can courts take judicial notice of local ordinances?

ANS:
1. Inferior courts should take mandatory judicial notice of municipal or city ordinances in
force in their territorial jurisdiction (U.S. vs Banco 37 Phl. 126;)
2. Regional Trial Courts should take judicial notice of municipal ordinances in force in the
municipalities within their jurisdiction but only when so required by law. (City of Manila
vs Garcia, 19 SCRA 413); also, on appeal to it from the inferior court in which the latter
took judicial notice of (U.S. vs Hernandez, G.R. No. L-9699, August 26, 1915)

Q. Can the Supreme Court take judicial notice of its previous rulings?
Ans: The Supreme Court has taken judicial notice of its record in a previous case in connection
with the conduct of the litigant or witness on a similar matter, but the Supreme Court does not
take judicial notice of proceedings of various courts of justice in the Philippines.

Q. Are matters of mandatory judicial notice required to be introduced as evidence?

ANS: Section 1, Rule 129 of the Rules of Court requires courts to take judicial notice, without
the introduction of evidence, of the existence and geographical divisions of our country. (People
vs Sevilleno GR No. 129058 March 10, 2004)

JUDICIAL NOTICE, WHEN DISCRETIONARY

Q. When is judicial notice discretionary?

ANS: 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
function (Rules of Court, Rule 129, Sec. 2)

Q. Up to what extent may the court take judicial notice?

ANS: Judicial notice is limited to facts evidenced by public records and facts of general
notoriety. Moreover, a judicially noticed fact must be on not subject to a reasonable dispute in
that it is either; (1) generally known within the territorial jurisdiction of the trial court; or (2)
capable of accurate determination by resorting to sources whose accuracy cannot reasonable be
questionable. (EVIDENCE, Riano 2016)

Q. What are matters of common knowledge?

ANS: Things of common knowledge of which courts take judicial notice of are, 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 or publications, are judicially noticed, provided that they are such universal
notoriety and so generally understood that they may be regarded as forming part of the common
knowledge of every person (Expertravel and Tours, Inc. vs Court of Appeals, 459 SCRA 147).

Q. Can courts take judicial notice of records of another case?

ANS: 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: 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 (1) with the knowledge of the
opposing party, (2) 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, (3) 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 (Republic of the Philippines vs Science Park of the
Philippines, Inc. G.R. No. 237714, November 12, 2018); or When the present action is closely
interrelated or interwoven to another case pending between the same parties (Laban vs Espina,
G.R. No. 170049, March 14, 2008).

Q. What is the difference between Judicial Notice and knowledge of the Judge.
ANS: Judicial notice may be taken of a fact which judges ought to know because of their
functions. It is not limited by the actual knowledge of the individual judge or court. A judge must
take judicial notice of a fact if it is one which is the proper subject of judicial cognizance even if
it is not within the personal knowledge of the judge. Knowledge of the Judge, on the other
hand, is the mere personal knowledge of the judfge, and he is not authorized to make his
individual knowledge of a fact, not generally or professionally known as basis of his action
(EVIDENCE, Riano 2016)

Q. Can the courts take judicial notice of foreign laws?

ANS: General Rule: It is well-settled in our jurisdiction that our courts cannot take judicial
notice of foreign laws. Like any other facts, they must be alleged and proved (Garcia vs Garcia-
Recio G.R. No. 138322, October 2, 2001)
Exception: In certain decided cases however, judicial notice has been taken of the laws of
another country:
1. Foreign statute accepted by the government (Republic vs Guanzon, G.R. No. L-22374,
December 18, 1974);
2. Common Law;
3. When a foreign law is part of a published treatise, periodical or pamphlet and the writer is
recognized in his profession or calling as expert in the subject, the court, may take
judicial notice of the treatise containing the foreign law (Ruled of Court, Rule 130, Sec.
46);
4. Foreign law which is generally well known, is within the actual knowledge of the court,
had been ruled upon in previous case before it and none of the parties claim otherwise.
5. Stipulation by the parties, when parties in a case agree on what the foreign law provides,
these are admissions of fact which the other parties and the court are made to rely and act
upon. Hence, they are in estoppel to subsequently take a contrary position (Phil
Commercial and Industrial Bank vs. Escolin. G.R. No. L-27860 and L-27896, March 29,
1974)

Q. What is the Doctrine of Processual Presumption

ANS: Where a foreign law is not pleaded or, even if pleaded, is not proved, the presumption is
that foreign law is the same as ours. Stated otherwise, in the absence of evidence of the law of
the foreign country, Philippine laws should be applied under the doctrine of processual
presumption (Laureano vs Court of Appeals 324 SCRA 414)

JUDICIAL NOTICE, WHEN HEARING NECESSARY

Q. When is hearing necessary for the court to take judicial notice of a matter?
ANS: (a). During the pre-trial and the trial, the court, motu proprio or upon motion, shall hear
the parties on the proprietary of taking judicial notice of any matter;
(b) 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 of the case. (Rules of Court, Rule 129 Sec. 3)

Q. What is the purpose of the hearing?

ANS: It is not for the presentation of evidence, but to afford the parties the reasonable
opportunity to present information relevant to the proprietary of taking such judicial notice or the
tenor of the matter to be noticed (People vs Presilie, 70 Cal. App. 3d 486).

JUDICIAL ADMISSIONS

Q: What is a judicial admission?

ANS: it is an admission, oral or written, made by the party in the course of proceedings in the
same case and does not require proof (Rules of Court, Rule 129 Sec. 4)

Q: What is the effect of a judicial admission?

ANS: A judicial admission becomes conclusive upon the party making it and does not require
proof, except when it is shown that the admission was made through palpable mistake and when
it is shown that no such admission was in fact made.

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. Consequently, 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 of or
inconsistent with what was pleaded (Alfelor vs Halasan G.R. No. 165987 March 31, 2006)

Q: What are the requisites of Judicial Admission?

ANS:
1. The same must be made by a party to the case
2. The admission must be made in the course of the proceedings in the same case; and
3. There is no particular form for an admission, may it be written or verbal. (EVIDENCE,
Riano 2016).

Q: May Admissions be made in pleadings and motions?

ANS: Admissions made in the pleadings of a party are deemed judicial admissions and includes
those made in the complaint (Delfin vs Billones, 485 SCRA 38)
Admissions made in a motion are judicial admissions which are binding on the party who made
them. Such party is precluded from denying the same inless there is proof of palpable mistake.
Admissions, however, made in drafts of pleadings not yet filed are obviously not judicial
admissions because they are not parts of the records of the case (EVIDENCE, Riano, 2016)

Q: May admissions be made in amended pleadings?

ANS: When a pleading is amended, the amended pleading supersedes the pleading that it
amends and the admission in the superseded pleading may be received in evidence against the
pleader (Sec.8 Rule 10, Rules of Court)

Q: What is the nature of admissions in superseded pleadings?

ANS: Admissions in a superseded pleading are to be considered as extrajudicial admissions
which must be proven. Pleadings that have been amended disappear from the record, lose their
statues as pleadings, and cease to be judicial admissions, and to be utilized as extrajudicial
admissions, they must be formally offered in evidence (Torres vs Court of Appeals, G.R. No. L-
37420-21, June 26, 1996)

Q: May an admission be made by the counsel?

ANS: General Rule: Admissions by counsel are conclusive upon a client. Even the negligence
of counsel binds the client (Sarraga vs Banco Filipino Savings & Mortgage Bank, 393 SCRA
566).
Exception: In cases were reckless and gross negligence of counsel deprives the client of due
process of law, or when its application will result in outright deprivation of the client’s liberty or
property, or when the interest of justice so require, relief is accorded the client who suffered by
reason of the lawyer’s gross or palpable mistake or negligence (Salazar vs Court of Appeals G.R.
No. 142920, February 6, 2002).

Q: May admissions be implied?

ANS: An admission made also be inferred from the failure to specifically deny the material
allegations in the other party’s pleadings. In actionable documents, when an action or defense is
founded upon a written instrument, the genuineness and due execution of the same instrument
shall be deemed admitted unless the adverse party, under oath, specifically denies them and sets
forth what he claims to be the facts (Rules of Court, Rule 8, Sec. 8; Philippine National Bank vs
Refrigeration Industries, Inc., 479 SCRA 240)
Q: May admission be made during the pre-trial stage?
ANS: In pre-trial of civil cases, admissions made in a stipulation of facts by the parties in the
pre-trial are treated as judicial admissions (Eastern Shipping Lines, Inc vs BPI/MS Insurance
Corporation G.R. No. 182684, January 12, 2015). 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 (Rules of Court, Rule
118, Sec. 2).

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 (Eastern
Shipping Lines, Inc vs BPI/MS Insurance Corporation G.R. No. 182684, January 12, 2015)

Q: How may judicial admissions be contradicted?

ANS: (a) by showing that the admission was made through palpable mistake. The mistake that
would relieve a party from the effect of his admission is not any mistake. It must be one that is
“palpable”, a mistake that is “clear to the mid or plain to see. It is a mistake that is readily
perceived by the senses or the mind (EVIDENE, Riano 2016)

(b) by showing that no such admission was made (Rules of Court, Rule 129, Sec. 4). This
argument may be invoked when the statement of a party is taken out of context or that his
statement was not made in the sense it is made to appear by the other party.