ETHIOPIAN POLICE UNIVERSITY

CADET SCHOOL

13th ROUND POST GRADUATE DIPLOMA PROGRAM

COURSE TITLE: LAW OF EVIDENCE

ASSIGMENT TITLE: JUDICIAL NOTICE OF LAW

GROUP ASSIGMENT SECTION: 02 GROUP: 01

GROUP MEMBERS: ID NO

1. BERHANU LETA…………………………………..…………..……......PGD/051/15

2. DEMEKE SHIMELIS………………..………………………….……….PGD/057/15

3. ENDALK TADESE……………………..…………………………......…PGD/059/15

4. HAILU EDAE…………………………………….…………...……...…..PGD/067/15

5. HAWI MERGA ……………………………………...………...……...….PGD/068/15

6. MESERET GIZAWU………………………………..…….…..................PGD/074/15

7. SAMUEL GASHURA……………………………………….....…….......PGD/077/15

8. TIGIST ANDUALEM………………………………….……….....……..PGD/082/15

9. WUBET YAZIE…………………………………………….……...…..…PGD/084/15

10. YAKOB BANCHA………………………………………………..…….PGD/086/15

11. YILKAL AYENEW………………………………………………....….PGD/089/15

SUBMITTED TO: INSP. ADUGNA M.

SUBMISSION DATE: 24/04/2016 E.C

Sendafa, Ethiopia
1. What is Judicial Notice of Law?

We tried to define judicial notice of law with providing many definitions or clarifications on
the given concept. Here are some definitions of judicial notice of the law:

 Judicial Notice of Law is a legal doctrine that allows a judge to accept certain facts as
true without requiring the parties to provide evidence to prove them. Because the
issue that arise between parties may not only be issues of fact but also issues of law. [
see Art 240 of civ.p.c ]

 It is typically used for facts that are well-known, easily verifiable, or found in publicly
accessible sources such as laws, regulations, or official documents.

 Facts that can be “judicially noticed” are facts so notorious or generally accepted as
not to be the subject of debate among reasonable persons.

 When judicial notice is taken of a fact, no formal evidence of that fact must be
introduced at the trial or hearing.

 It is a method used by a court when it declares a fact presented as evidence as true

without a formal presentation of evidence.

 A court can take judicial notice of indisputable facts, usually for purposes of
convenience.

 It is a rule in the law of evidence that allows a fact to be introduced into evidence if
the truth of that fact is so notorious or well-known, or so authoritatively attested, that
it cannot reasonably be doubted. This is done upon the request of the party seeking to
rely on the fact at issue and materials admitted under judicial notice are accepted
without being formally introduced by a witness or other rule of evidence, even if one
party wishes to plead evidence to the contrary.

 Judicial notice is frequently used for the simplest, most obvious common sense facts,
such as which day of the week corresponded to a particular calendar date or the
approximate time at sunset. No one is required to provide evidence that Monday
follows Sunday, that the sun rises in the east, or any of the other innumerable facts
which are “generally known”.

1
 It refers to a doctrine in the legal system where a court recognizes certain laws, legal
principles, or rules without requiring proof or formal presentation of evidence.

In order to have more clear understanding of the concept, we also tried to provide some
examples as follows:

 All laws of the empire of Ethiopian and generally any matter published in the
negarit gazeta.

 The geographical boundaries of Ethiopia as defined by official government

documents or maps.

 The official languages of Ethiopia, which are Amharic, Oromo, Tigrinya, and
others as recognized by the government.

 The Ethiopian calendar, which is different from the Gregorian calendar and is
widely used in the country.

 The laws and regulations enacted by the Ethiopian government, including those
published in the official gazette.

 The official currency of Ethiopia, which is the Ethiopian birr.

 The existence and powers of government institutions and offices as established by

the Ethiopian Constitution or other legal instruments.

 The national holidays and public observances recognized by the Ethiopian

government.

 The customary practices and traditions of specific ethnic groups within Ethiopia, as
recognized by the government or supported by anthropological or historical
evidence.

 The existing title and national flag of every state or sovereign recognized by the
government of Ethiopia and every international organization of which Ethiopia is a
member.

2
2. Do the process of taking judicial notice of law similar in civil and common la w
countries?

In both civil and common law countries, the process of taking judicial notice of law has
similarities in principle. The process of taking judicial notice of law is similar in civil and
common law countries in that both systems allow courts to take notice of certain facts or laws
without the need for formal proof or evidence, or courts can take judicial notice of facts that
are considered to be well-known or indisputable, such as the length of a year or the fact that
water freezes at a certain temperature.

However, the specific procedural rules for taking judicial notice of law, as well as the scope
and application of this doctrine, may vary to some extent based on the legal tradition and the
specific legal system in each country.

In civil law countries, judicial notice typically involves codified rules and legal provisions,
while in common law countries, it involves recognition of established legal precedents and
principles.

In civil law countries, the process may be more formalized and may require specific statutory
provisions or rules of court while in common law countries, the process may be more flexible
and may allow for judicial notice to be taken based on the judge's own knowledge or
experience.

In common law countries, judges have a broader discretion to take judicial notice of certain
facts, including established legal principles or commonly known facts, without requiring
formal proof. This is rooted in the principle of stare decisis, where previous court decisions
serve as binding precedents while in civil law countries, the process is generally more
restrictive. Judges rely heavily on statutory law and legal codes, and there's less emphasis on
binding precedent. As a result, the concept of judicial notice may be less common, and judges
might be more inclined to require formal evidence or citation to legal sources.

In addition to above points of difference of the process of taking judicial notice of law in civil
and common law countries, we also tried to put some points of difference regarding the
process of taking judicial notice of law in civil and common law in short and precise way in
the following the table. Here are also some points of differences regarding taking judicial
notice of law between in civil and common law countries.

3
A.NO Points of difference Common law Civil law
1 Scope of Application Judicial notice is often more May have a narrower
expansive, encompassing a broader scope, focusing primarily
range of legal principles and facts on well-established
based on precedent. statutory laws and
recognized legal sources.
2 Emphasis on Precedent Heavily rely on precedents, Which prioritize codified
allowing judges to take judicial laws, may be less reliant on
notice of previously decided cases precedent and more
and established legal principles. focused on the explicit
provisions of statutes.
3 Formality and Procedure The procedural aspects of taking Might rely more on the
judicial notice can differ. Common discretion of the judge
law systems may have more within the framework of
formalized rules or guidelines for statutory law.
when and how judicial notice can
be taken.
4 Discretion of the Court may have more latitude to May be more constrained
recognize new or evolving legal by existing statutes and
principles, legal codes.
5 Challenge and Review the use of judicial notice can be May have different
subject to rigorous scrutiny, avenues or standards for
review.

These differences reflect the distinct historical, philosophical, and procedural foundations of
civil and common law traditions, influencing how judicial notice is understood and applied in
each context.

There are also some similarities regarding the process of taking judicial notice of law in both
civil and common law countries:

Foundational Legal Principles: Both systems recognize certain fundamental legal

principles, statutes, or well-established facts that courts can accept without requiring formal
proof.

4
Streamlining Proceedings: Judicial notice is employed in both systems to expedite trials and
reduce the burden of proving universally accepted facts or laws.

Commonly Recognized Facts: Both legal traditions allow courts to take notice of facts that
are commonly known within the jurisdiction, such as the structure of the government or basic
legal terminology.

Limitations on Discretion: Despite the ability to take judicial notice, courts in both systems
are bound by certain limitations, ensuring that the process is not abused or used improperly.

Reviewable on Appeal: Decisions related to the application of judicial notice can be

reviewed on appeal in both civil and common law jurisdictions to ensure proper application
and adherence to legal standards.

These similarities highlight the shared principles underlying the use of judicial notice, even
though the specific rules and practices may vary between individual countries and within
different legal contexts.

 Application in Practice

In practice, judicial notice of law in civil law and common law countries may look similar in
terms of the foundational principles and the recognition of well-established legal principles.
However, the specific procedures and standards for taking judicial notice may vary based on
the legal traditions, legal codes, and the level of deference given to previously established
legal authorities

3. Do you think there is any difference in the Ethiopian context regarding civil and
criminal cases as to whether the opposing side should have the option of introducing
contrary evidence once judicial notice is taken?

In the Ethiopian context, there may be differences in the treatment of civil and criminal cases
when it comes to introducing contrary evidence after judicial notice is taken.

 In civil cases, the opposing side may have the option of introducing contrary evidence
to challenge the facts that were judicially noticed. This is because civil cases often
involve disputes between private parties where the presentation of evidence is crucial to
determining the outcome.

5
  In criminal cases, the rules regarding introducing contrary evidence after judicial notice
may be more stringent. This is because criminal cases involve the prosecution of
individuals for alleged violations of criminal law, and the burden of proof is on the
prosecution to prove the guilt of the accused beyond a reasonable doubt. As a result, the
introduction of contrary evidence after judicial notice may be more restricted in
criminal cases to ensure the fair and just determination of guilt or innocence.

In the Ethiopian legal context, differences may indeed arise between civil and criminal cases
regarding the option of introducing contrary evidence once judicial notice is taken. These
distinctions often reflect the unique procedural and evidentiary considerations present in civil
and criminal proceedings.

In civil cases, which typically involve private disputes between individuals or entities, the
standard of proof often centers on the preponderance of evidence. In these instances, parties
are generally afforded more latitude to introduce contrary evidence following a judicial
notice. This flexibility stems from the civil nature of the disputes, where the objective is often
to prove whether a party's claim is more likely than not to be true and where the opportunity
to present opposing evidence is fundamental to procedural fairness.

Conversely, in criminal cases, which involve offenses against the state and the public, a
higher standard of proof often beyond a reasonable doubt is required to establish guilt. As a
result, criminal cases are characterized by a stricter approach to the introduction of evidence
once judicial notice is established.

These distinctions may be incorporated into procedural rules, evidentiary standards, or

evidentiary presumptions specific to civil and criminal cases. Understanding these differences
is crucial for legal practitioners, judges, and parties involved in litigation.

Balancing Fairness and Legal Standards:

The differing approaches to the introduction of contrary evidence post-judicial notice reflect a
delicate balance between safeguarding fairness, protecting the rights of the accused, and
maintaining the integrity of the legal process across civil and criminal matters.

Overall, in both civil and criminal cases, the fundamental purpose of respecting the principles
of natural justice and fairness while upholding the proper administration of justice remains
paramount, regardless of the varying procedural standards.

6
4. Some cases hold that a fact judicially noticed is indisputable and therefore no
evidence can be introduced to rebut such facts, other cases hold that a matter judicially
noticed means merely that it is taken as true until the opponent offers competent
evidence to the contrary. How can we reconcile the two views?

The differing views on the conclusiveness of a fact judicially noticed are indeed a fascinating
aspect of legal interpretation and debate. Reconciling these views often involves examining
the core principles of evidence law, purpose, the context of judicial notice, and the
application of burden of proof standards.

Here's how we can approach reconciling these two perspectives.

Foundational Principles:

 Respecting Judicial Notice and Evidentiary Standards

Both perspectives recognize the importance of judicially noticed facts, emphasizing their
significance in legal reasoning and decision-making. This highlights the fundamental role of
judicial notice in ensuring efficiency and fairness in legal proceedings.

 Bearing the Burden of Rebuttal

While one view argues for the indisputability of judicially noticed facts, the other highlights
the burden of the opponent to present competent evidence to the contrary. Each approach
acknowledges the need for a party to challenge or address a judicially noticed fact through
the introduction of contrary evidence.

Reconciliation: Balancing these differing views requires an approach that acknowledges the
fundamental purpose of judicial notice while also recognizing the potential for presenting
contrary evidence within the bounds of established evidentiary standards.

 Presumed Validity until Rebutted: A reconciled approach might involve

acknowledging that a fact judicially noticed is presumed to be valid and accepted until
it is successfully rebutted by competent evidence. This approach respects the initial
recognition of the fact while allowing for an avenue to challenge or clarify its validity
through the presentation of contrary evidence.
 Burden of Production and Persuasion: The party seeking to challenge a judicially
noticed fact should bear the burden of production, meaning they need to present

7
 competent evidence to contest the fact. Furthermore, if the challenger seeks to
completely rebut the noticed fact, they should also bear the burden of persuasion,
meaning they should demonstrate the invalidity of the noticed fact to the satisfaction of
the court.
 Context Matters: The weight given to a fact that is judicially noticed can depend on
the context in which it is introduced. In some instances, the fact might be so
universally accepted that introducing evidence to challenge it would be redundant. In
other situations, especially where the fact's relevance or applicability is contested,
evidence may still be permitted to challenge or refine its application.
 Presumption vs. Rebuttal: One view sees judicial notice as establishing an absolute
presumption, while the other sees it as a rebuttable presumption. The reconciliation
could lie in recognizing that while certain facts might be initially accepted without
question, the door remains open for parties to present evidence if they can show that
the noticed fact, in the specific circumstances of the case, should not apply.
 Degree of Certainty: Another perspective is to consider the degree of certainty
associated with the fact. For universally acknowledged facts, there may be no room for
rebuttal. However, for facts that might be subject to interpretation or that have varying
degrees of applicability, the allowance for rebuttal makes sense.

Ultimately, the reconciliation of these views may involve a case-by-case analysis,

considering the specific nature of the fact at issue, the available evidence, and the overall
fairness and effectiveness of the judicial process. It may also involve a flexible approach that
seeks to balance the need for efficiency with the requirement for fairness and the opportunity
for parties to present their case.

5. In Nicketta, et at v. National Tea Co., 338 Ill. App. 159 case, the court took judicial notice
that a human being could not contract the disease, trichinosis, from eating pork which had
been properly cooked. Then it went on to say in the opinion that this fact judicially noticed
was conclusive as against the plaintiff, because the plaintiff offered no scientist, doctor, book,
article, test, or other authority which would 'establish or tend to establish that a human being
can acquire trichinosis from eating pork which had been properly cooked. How do you see
the decision of the court?

We tried to provide two answer for the above the given case.

8
Answer 1

Analysis of the Nicketta v. National Tea Co. Case In the case of Nicketta v. National Tea Co.,
the court took judicial notice that a human being could not contract trichinosis from properly
cooked pork and held that this fact was conclusive against the plaintiff. This decision seems
to follow the view that once a fact is judicially noticed, no evidence can be introduced to
rebut it. However, the court's approach may be seen as more rigid, potentially limiting the
opportunity for the presentation of contrary evidence, especially if the matter is subject to
evolving scientific understanding.

In this case, a more balanced approach may involve recognizing the judicially noticed fact as
presumed true unless rebutted by competent evidence. This allows for the possibility of
introducing contrary evidence to challenge the judicially noticed fact, particularly in cases
where scientific or factual developments may impact previously established presumptions.
It's important to note that judicial notice and its effects are subject to judicial interpretation
and may vary based on jurisdiction and evolving legal standards.

Answer 2

The decision of the court in Nicketta, et at v. National Tea Co. to take judicial notice that a
human being could not contract trichinosis from properly cooked pork could be seen as
reasonable based on the available scientific knowledge at the time. However, it is important
to note that scientific knowledge and understanding can evolve over time, and what was
considered conclusive at the time of the court's decision may not be the case in the future.

Additionally, it is concerning that the court considered this fact to be conclusive against the
plaintiff without allowing for the presentation of scientific evidence or expert testimony. It is
important for courts to consider all available evidence and expert opinions in making their
decisions, especially in cases involving scientific or medical matters.

Overall, while the court's decision may have been based on the scientific knowledge available
at the time, it is important for courts to remain open to considering new evidence and expert
testimony in order to make informed and fair decisions.