Chapter Two

Alternative Means of Proof of Facts

 Chapter Two
Alternative Means of Proof of Facts

Admitted facts

Presumption

Judicial Notice
 Introduction
 Where a party has burden of proof on a fact in issue, the
fact has to be proven by relevant and admissible evidence.
 However, certain allegation of fact by a party does not
necessarily need proof.
 There are three exceptions to the general rule requiring
evidence to be adduced where the court may treat a fact as
proven with out the need for the party to put evidence
before the court.
 These are cases of Admitted facts, Presumption and Judicial
Notice.
 Admitted Facts
 Admission is a statement of fact, which waives or disputes
with the production of evidence by conceding that the fact
asserted by the opponent is true.
 Because, what a person himself admits to be true may
reasonably be presumed to be so, and until the presumption
is rebutted, the fact admitted has to be taken as evidence.
 Because, in the normal course of things, a person does not
make himself liable by admitting facts against him self
unless those allegations are true, and he is expected to know
facts relating to him better than any body else.
 Admitted Facts
 In some countries the term “admission” is only used in civil
cases and “confession” in criminal cases.
 While others used the term” admission” in both civil and
criminal cases.
 But we can take “confession” as a species of “admission”
which is applicable only in criminal cases.
 Why admitted facts need no proof?
 Courts are set up to try issues in dispute.
 When no dispute exists, proof ordinary should not be
required.
 Admitted Facts
 Thus, where a party admits the truth of a fact in issue in the case,
the fact ceases to be in dispute between the parties, and as such,
any evidence to prove the fact will be ruled as in admissible on the
ground that it is irrelevant except in some serious criminal cases
like a homicide.
 Because in the normal course of things, a person does not make
himself liable by admitting facts against himself unless those
allegations are true, and he is expected to know facts relating to
him better than any body else.
 But if proof is required for such admitted facts, undue delay will
be created since other cases a wait the court's attention. And
undue delay causes injustice to others as well as the parties before
the court. Art 242, 235 of civ-p.c and Art 134 of cri.p.c
 Admitted Facts
Limitations of Admissions
In some cases ''Admitted facts need not be proved” is less
applicable.
This is especially true in criminal cases in which the court may
exclude confessions on the grounds of oppression, unfairness and the
like.
Confessions or self-incriminatory statements have to be
tested against the presumption of innocence under the
constitution. (Art 20(3) of the constitution).
Confessions must be accepted or rejected as a whole and that
the court is not competent to accept only the inculpatory part
while rejecting the exculpatory part as being inherently
incredible.
 Admitted Facts
Limitations of Admissions
Even though the confessions are made without reservation, the court may
reject them if it is satisfied from other circumstances that they are untrue.
(see Art 134(2), 135 of cr.pc).
Because, experience has shown that suspects confess for all sorts of
reasons even where they know that they are innocent of the allegation made
against them.
So we can say that confession does not avoid the need for proof and this
makes confession a very weak kind of evidence.
However, the effect of admission is in most cases destructive in civil cases
since they can not be contradicted once they are made and the court may
not require further proof because of the less standard of proof required in
civil cases.
 However, if the admission is vague or doubtful, the court may require
proof even in civil cases.
 Admitted Facts
Limitations of Admissions
Even though the confessions are made without reservation, the court may
reject them if it is satisfied from other circumstances that they are untrue.
(see Art 134(2), 135 of cr.pc).
Because, experience has shown that suspects confess for all sorts of
reasons even where they know that they are innocent of the allegation made
against them.
So we can say that confession does not avoid the need for proof and this
makes confession a very weak kind of evidence.
However, the effect of admission is in most cases destructive in civil cases
since they can not be contradicted once they are made and the court may
not require further proof because of the less standard of proof required in
civil cases.
 However, if the admission is vague or doubtful, the court may require
proof even in civil cases.
 Admitted Facts
Classification of Admission: formal and informal admissions
Admission may exist in the form of formal admission and
informal admissions in both civil and criminal cases.
A party may formally admit a fact in the pleadings in the
case, i.e. in statement of claim or in defense or in a counter
claim or in reply.
He may also admit in open court in the first hearing or at the
trial.
Moreover, in criminal cases a formal admission may be
made to a person in authority i.e. to the police officer in
answers to interrogations. (Art 270 of cr.p.c).
 Admitted Facts
Classification of Admission: formal and informal admissions
An informal admission is a written or an oral statement made by a party
or by a person connected with the party that is adverse to that party's
interests, and is most commonly made in a letter, fax or an e mail.
An informal admission may also be made orally in a witness's answer to a
question asked in cross-examination.
It also be made spontaneously by a person in response to the events given
rise to the cause of action.
 Mostly, informal admissions are out-of-court admissions to a person who
are not authorized to accept admissions, for example, to a friend.
Where an informal admission has been made, it may be disproved or
explained (corroborated) by other evidence at the trial and it is at the
court's discretion to decide how much weight should be attached to the
statement
 Admitted Facts
Types of Admissions: Judicial and Extra- Judicial
Judicial admissions are those admissions made as part of the proceeding
in the lawsuit.
The mere fact that the admission is made before the court of law does not
make it a judicial admission. To be considered as judicial admission, it
should be given before the court, which handled the case, and not in other
courts as the case in Art 35 of cr.pc.
They are ordinary conclusive on the party making them and may not be
contradicted.
Extra- Judicial admissions as opposed to judicial admission are not made
in the course of court proceedings even though in criminal matters they
may have been made in the course of the criminal proceedings.
You may think of confession made before the investigative police.(see Art
27 of cr.P.c)
 Admitted Facts
Types of Admissions: Judicial and Extra- Judicial
Judicial admissions are those admissions made as part of the proceeding in the
lawsuit.
The mere fact that the admission is made before the court of law does not make it
a judicial admission. To be considered as judicial admission, it should be given
before the court, which handled the case, and not in other courts as the case in Art
35 of cr.pc.
They are ordinary conclusive on the party making them and may not be
contradicted.
Extra- Judicial admissions as opposed to judicial admission are not made in the
course of court proceedings even though in criminal matters they may have been
made in the course of the criminal proceedings.
You may think of confession made before the investigative police.(see Art 27 of
cr.P.c)
Evidentiary admissions may be submitted as evidence but they are not conclusive
as judicial admissions and they may be contradicted
 Presumption
 Presumption is an inference made about one fact from which the court
is entitled to presume certain other facts without having those facts
directly prove by evidence.
 In this, the proof of one fact is taken as the proof of the other fact.
Where there is an issue before a court the one that has to be proven is
the disputed fact.
 However, the proof of such fact may not be needed if a fact the proof of
which is equivalent to the proof of the disputed fact is proved.
 Here a party who wants to benefit from presumptions must go the half
way i.e. he must first prove the basic fact unless such fact is admitted by
the other party.
 If the proof of A' makes the existence of fact “B” more probable it is
sensible and time saving to assume the truth of fact “B” until the
adversary disproves it.
 Presumption
 Presumptions can be divided as presumption of fact
(permissive inferences) and presumption of law.
 Presumption of fact is logical inferences that can be drawn by
experience upon proof of the basic fact.
 Such inferences are mostly true in the normal course of things.

 Presumptions of law are presumption which the law requires

the court to make.
 They are mandatory in the sense that, where the law requires
the court to presume a certain fact the court can not refuse to
presume.
 These presumptions used the phrase” shall be deemed or
presumed”.
 Presumption
 Presumptions of law are of two types: rebuttable and irrebuttable
presumptions.
 In principle, presumption has the effect of shifting the burden of
proof from the party in who's employed in case of presumption of
fact and reputable presumptions.
 However, conclusive or irrebuttable presumption is really an
awkwardly expressed rule of law which can not be disproved by
another party.
 Thus irrebuttable presumptions do not have the effect of shifting the
burden of production to another party.
 Once the person who has the irrebuttable presumption on his side
proves the basic fact then the other party will be won without
counter proof on his side, even if he has possible grounds of
disproving the allegations.
 Presumption
 Permissive presumptions, like presumption of fact, they are not
mandatory, and like presumption of law they are prescribed under
the law.
 The provisions of the law which provides permissive presumption
contain the phrase” may presume...” which shows its permissive
nature.
 For instance, consider Art 22 of civil code which provides” where a
person refuses to submit himself to a medical examination had the
object of ascertaining not involving any serious danger for the
human body the court may consider as established the fact which the
examination had the object of ascertaining. Here, for example, a
person charged of knowingly transmitting AIDS to woman may
refuse to summit to examination. [Art 20(1) of civil code]. However,
the court may consider the status of the accused as HIV positive.
 Judicial Notice
 Judicial notice refers to circumstances in which the judicial system
assumes a factual proposition to be true even without proof of that
proposition.
 It refers to facts which a judge can be called up on to receive and to act
up on either from his know ledge of them or from enquires to be made
by him self for his own in formation from sources to which it is proper
for him to refer.
 In such cases when the matter alleged is so well known to the court it
would be a waste of time to compel the party to offer evidence of its
truth.
 Taking judicial notice has a great value to the courts and the litigant
parties in shortening of trials.
 The law may require a court to take a judicial notice of a certain facts.
 A mater of common knowledge or it may be capable of certain
determination by sources whose authority is not questioned.