VOLCANOTES 2020 | EVIDENCE
Rule 129 own, relieving the party of any
WHAT NEED NOT BE PROVED
A. JUDICIAL NOTICE
Sec. 1 Judicial notice, when mandatory – A court shall
take judicial notice, without 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.
ü The new rule clarifies that ONLY official acts of
the:
o Legislative,
o Executive, and
o Judicial departments
Of the national government are those subjects
of mandatory judicial notice.
ü Same acts of the LGU are generally NOT subject
of mandatory judicial notice.
ü Social Justice Society v. Atienza, the SC ruled
that while courts are required to take judicial
notice of the laws enacted by Congress, the
rule with respect to local ordinances is
different.
o Ordinances – NOT included in the
enumeration of matters covered by
Sec. 1, Rule 129 of the ROC.
o In Social Justice Society, it was alleged
that Sec. 50 of RA 409 of Manila,
provides that “All courts sitting in city
shall take judicial notice of the
ordinances passed by the Sangguniang
Panglungsod.”
§ SC ruled that the provision
CANNOT be taken to mean that
the SC, since it has it seat the
City of Manila, should have
taken steps to procure copy of
the Manila ordinance on its
duty to inform the SC about it.
§ Even when 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.
ü The intent of a statute requiring a court to take
judicial notice of a local ordinance is to remove
any discretion a court might have in
determining whether or not to take notice of
an ordinance. Such a statute does not direct
the court to act on its own in obtaining
evidence for the record and a party must make
the ordinance available to the court for it to
take notice.
Sec. 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.
Sec. 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.
ü Even during the pre-trial, matters sought to be
taken judicial notice of, may be heard.
o The old rule provided that the hearing
on matters sought to be taken judicial
notice of may take place during trial,
without mentioning pre-trial.
1
 VOLCANOTES 2020 | EVIDENCE
ü “may” to “shall” – the intention is to make
mandatory the hearing on the matter sought to
be taken judicial notice of, whether it be during
pre-trial, at any time before judgment and
even on appeal.
ü NOTE:
GR: theories, issues, and arguments not
brought to the attention of the trial court will
not be considered by a reviewing court,
XPN: when their factual bases would not
require presentation of any further evidence
by the adverse party in order to enable him to
properly meet the issue raised, such as when
the factual bases of such novel theory, issue or
argument is (a) subject of judicial notice; or (b)
had already been judicially admitted.
Sec. 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.
ü There are matters in a litigation which must be
admitted without need for evidence.
o EXAMPLE:
§ When the complainant in a
criminal case alleges that he
was assaulted by the accused in
Quezon City, it would be
ridiculous to require the
prosecution to prove that a
place called Quezon City exists.
§ If the accused is charged with
violation of a statute, there is no
need to introduce evidence that
said statute exists because the
court is charged with
knowledge of the law, it being
the product of an official act of
the Legislative department of
the Philippines.
ü Judicial notice – matters which the court may
take cognizance of without evidence.
o It is based on the maxim, “what is
known need not be proved”
ü Taking of judicial notice is a matter of
expediency and convenience for it fulfills the
purpose that the evidence is intended to
achieve, and in this sense, it is equivalent to
proof.
ü Function of JN – takes the place of proof and is
of equal force.
o Displaces evidence and fulfills the
purpose for which evidence is designed
to fulfill.
§ It makes evidence unnecessary.
ü When judicial notice is mandatory – no motion
or hearing is necessary.
ü The following are matters subject to
mandatory judicial notice:
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
Philippines;
g. Laws of nature;
h. Measure of time; and
i. Geographical divisions.
ü When JN is discretionary – when matters
involved are of:
o Public knowledge, or
o Are capable of unquestionable
demonstration, or
o Ought to be known to judges because
of their judicial functions.
2
 VOLCANOTES 2020 | EVIDENCE
ü The principal guide in determining what facts
may be assumed to be judicially known is that
of notoriety.
o JN – is limited to facts evidenced by
public records and facts of general
notoriety.
ü A judicially noticed fact must be one 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 and ready
determination by resorting to sources
whose accuracy cannot reasonably be
questionable.
ü Things of “common knowledge” – matters
coming to the knowledge of men generally in
the course of ordinary experiences of life, or
they may be matters which is generally
accepted by mankind.
ü Judicial notice may be taken of a fact which
judges ought to know because of their judicial
function.
ü Judicial notice is NOT judicial knowledge – the
mere personal knowledge of the judge is NOT
judicial knowledge of the court.
o The judge is NOT authorized to make
his individual knowledge of a fact, not
generally or professionally known, as
the basis of his action.
ü Stage when judicial notice may be taken –
during the pre-trial, trial, and on appeal (before
judgment) (Sec. 3, Rule 129)
o During pre-trial and trial, the court may
announce its intention to take judicial
notice of any matter.
§ It may do so in its own initiative
or on the request of any party
and allow the parties to be
heard.
o JN may also be taken after the trial, and
before judgment.
ü JN of foreign laws; doctrine of processual
presumption – our courts cannot take JN of
foreign laws, like any matter, they must be
alleged and proved.
o Foreign laws must be alleged and
proved. In the absence of proof, the
foreign law will be presumed to be the
same as the laws of the jurisdiction
hearing the case (doctrine of
processual presumption)
§ In the absence of evidence of
the law of the foreign country,
PH law should be applied.
o HOWEVER, when the law is generally
well-known had been ruled upon in
previous cases before, and none of the
parties claim otherwise, the court may
take judicial notice of the foreign law.
o When the foreign law refers to the law
of nations – said law is subject to a
mandatory JN under Sec. 1 of Rule 129.
§ WHY? Under the PH
Constitution, the PH adopts
generally-accepted principles of
international law as part of the
law of the land. (Art. II, Sec. 2,
1987 Constitution)
ü Judicial notice of municipal ordinances –
o MTC – should take JN of municipal
ordinances in force in the municipality
in which they sit.
o RTC – should take JN of municipal
ordinances in force in the municipalities
within their jurisdiction, BUT ONLY
WHEN SO REQUIRED.
§ EXAMPLE: The charter of the
City of Manila requires all courts
sitting therein to take judicial
notice also of all ordinances
passed by the city council.
o CA – may take JN of municipal
ordinances because nothing in the
Rules prohibits it from taking
cognizance if an ordinance which is
capable of unquestionable
demonstration.
3
 VOLCANOTES 2020 | EVIDENCE
ü JN of a court’s own acts and records - a court
will take JN of its own acts and records.
(Republic v. CA)
o XPN: Courts are NOT authorized to take
JN of the contents of the records of
other cases.
o XPN to the XPN:
1. When in the absence of any
objection and with the knowledge
of the opposing party, the
contents of said other case are
clearly referred to it by title and
number in a pending action and
adopted or read into the record of
the latter; or
2. When the original record of the
other case or any part of it is
actually withdrawn form the
archives at the court’s discretion
upon the request, or with
consent, of the parties, and
admitted as part of the record of
the pending case.
ü JN of proprietary acts of GOCCs –
o A management contract entered into
by a GOVV like that involving the
Philippine Ports Authority is NOT
among the matters which the courts
can take JN.
§ CANNOT eb considered as an
official act of the Executive
Department – because it was
entered into while performing
proprietary function. (Asian
Terminals, Inc. v. Malayan
Insurance Co.)
ü JN of Post Office practices – NOT a proper
subject of JN, because it is not covered by any
of the instances under Sec. 1, Rule 129.
ü JN of Banking practices – it may do so under
Sec. 2 of Rule 129, discretionary JN.
ü JN of the financial condition of the
Government – JN could be taken of the fact
that the government is and has for many years
been financially strapped, to the point that
even the most essential services have suffered
serious curtailment.
ü JN of presidential powers – the TC should take
JN of RA 6743, as implemented by EO 429, as
legal basis of the President’s power to
reorganize the executive department.
o Official acts of the legislative, executive
and judicial departments of the
Philippines ARE PROPER SUBJECTS OF
JN.
ü JN of other matters –
o Court CANNOT take JN of the assessed
value of a realty.
o JN: an overseas worker bears a great
degree of emotional strain while
making an effort to perform his work
well.
o Court CANNOT take JN f an
administrative regulation or of a statute
that is NOT yet effective.
§ Law which is still inexistent
cannot be of common
knowledge.
o MTC and MCTC judges may act as
notaries public ex officio in the
notarization of documents connected
only with the exercise of their official
functions and duties.
4
 VOLCANOTES 2020 | EVIDENCE
B. JUDICIAL ADMISSIONS
Sec. 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.
ü Judicial admission made by the parties in a
pleading or in the course of the trial or other
proceedings in the same case are conclusive
upon the party making the admission and
require no proof.
ü Judicial admissions legally binding on the
party making the admission.
o CANNOT be contradicted unless
previously shown to have been made
through palpable mistake to that no
such admission was made.
ü To be a JA under Sec. 4 of Rule 129:
1. Must be made by a party to the case.
2. Must be made in the course of the
proceedings in the same case.
3. Does NOT require any particular form.
It may be oral or written.
ü Stipulation of facts at the pre-trial of a case
constitutes JA.
o In criminal case, JA made by an accused
during a pre-trial requires a definite
form:
§ Reduced in writing and
§ Signed by the accused and
counsel (Sec. 2, Rule 118)
ü A party may make JA in:
1. Pleadings
2. During trial, either oral or written
3. In other stages of the judicial
proceedings.
ü Admissions made by the parties in the
pleadings or in the course of the trial or other
proceedings in the same case are conclusive
and do not require further evidence to prove
them.
ü Admissions made in drafts of pleadings NOT
yet filed are NOT JA.
o They are NOT parts of the records of the
case.
ü Averments in pleadings which are NOT deemed
admitted even if the party fails to make a
specific denial of the same:
o Immaterial allegations
o Conclusions
o Non-ultimate facts in the pleading
o Amount of unliquidated damages.
ü (CIVIL CASES) Admissions in the pre-trial,
depositions, interrogatories or requests for
admission, all deemed judicial admissions.
ü Admissions in the pre-trial of criminal cases to
be admitted as JA must be “reduced in writing
and signed y the accused and his counsel”.
ü Implied admissions in the modes of discovery
– admissions obtained through:
§ Depositions,
§ Written interrogatories
§ Requests for admission
Are ALL considered as JA.
ü When a pleading is amended, the amended
pleading supersedes the pleading that it
amends and the admissions in the superseded
pleading may be received in evidence against
the pleader.
o Nature of admissions in superseded
pleadings – Extrajudicial admissions, must
be proven.
§ Pleadings that have been
amended disappear form the
record, lose their status as
pleadings, and cease to be
judicial admissions.
5
 VOLCANOTES 2020 | EVIDENCE

ü Admissions in dismissed pleadings –

extrajudicial admissions.

ü Sworn statement of a proposed state witness

– if motion to discharge an accused as a state
witness is DENIED à his sworn statement,
submitted to support the motion, shall be
INADMISSIBLE in evidence. (Sec. 17, Rule 119)

ü Admissions by counsel – considered as JA.

o XPN: where reckless or 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 interests of
justice so require, relief is accorded
the client who suffered by reason of
the lawyer’s gross or palpable
mistake.

ü Effect of judicial admissions –

o Under Sec. 4, Rule 129, the following
are the effects of judicial admissions:
1. They do not require proof; and
2. They cannot be contradicted
because they are conclusive
upon the party making it.
o JAs are legally binding on the party
making it.

ü How JA may be contradicted – Sec. 4, Rule

129, provides for either of 2 ways:
1. By showing that the admission
was made through a palpable
mistake; or
2. By showing that no such
admission was made.