KAMPALA INTERNATIONAL UNIVERSITY

SCHOOL OF LAW

LAW OF EVIDENCE II

SECOND YEAR SECOND SEMESTER

LECTURER: Ms NAMBUSI MARIUM

TOPIC: JUDICIAL NOTICE.

GROUP MEMBERS REG.NO.s

1. NAMARA VICTOR 2021-08-05083

2. NAMARA SANDRA 2021-08-05971

3. NABIRYE JACKLINE 2021-08-05619

4. MUGISHA FRANCIS 2021-08-05350

5. NALWANGA SUZAN 2021-08-01444

6. NAJJUMA EMILY 2021-08-04549

7. BABISE SANDRA 2021-08-05683

8. WANDIRA BRIAN 2021-08-05520

9. ATUKWASTE
MESSIAH 2021-08-05857

1
 JUDICIAL NOTICE

Definition

Judicial notice is the process by which the court takes Cognizance or takes notice of matters which are so
notorious or clearly established that formal evidence to prove their existence is unnecessary as well as
matters of common knowledge and everyday life.

According to BLACK`S LAW DICTIONARY A matter or a practice is said to be notorious if it is generally

known or talked of and forms part of common knowledge universally. ARIM FELIX CLIVE VS STANBIC
BANK UGANDA (LTD) SUPREME COURT CIVIL APPEAL NO. 3 0F 2015, Justice Lillian Tibatemwa
defined Judicial Notice as a doctrine or process by which courts takes cognizance of a matter which is so
notorious or clearly established that there is no need of a party seeking for its recognition by court to
adduce a formal evidence for its proof. N.B It should be noted
that, the general rule is that, all the facts in issue or relevant to the issue in a given case must be proved by
evidence. For example; Documentary evidence, hearsay statement e.t.c. However in the case of JONES
VS PRESTONE,The court took a Judicial Notice to the fact that the duration of a human gestation period is
usually 9 months and not 1 year and there is no need of proof of evidence.

In addition to that, SECTION 55 OF THE EVIDENCE ACT CAP.6 State that Facts judicially noticeable need
not be proved. Since no fact of which the court will take judicial notice need be proved.

However in Uganda, if by any chance the plaintiff or prosecutor fails to prove an essential fact, his
opponent may succeed on the submission that their no case to answer although the evidence was readily
available. Although the court reserves the discretion of deciding whether the witness can be recalled or not.

In MIDDLETON VS ROWLETT (1954) 2 ALL ER.277, The accused was charged of a traffic offence, but the
prosecution failed to ask a police officer who was a witness during trial but who failed to identify whether
the apprehended vehicle driver was the one being accused, The court took a judicial notice on the fact that
since the prosecution failed to prove an essential fact of the case, thus the accused had no case to answer.

In DUFF DEVELOPMENT CO.LTD VS KELANTAN GOVERNMENT (MALASYIA) (1924) 2ALL E.R, The
Malaysian government entered into a mining contract with DUFF CO.LTD.The Arbitration act stated that
incase a foreign company was in dispute with the government, the dispute had to be resolved with using
(A.D.R) Alternative dispute resolution.Breach of the contract ensued and DUFF CO.LTD went to court.The
court took a judicial notice based on statutory provisions of Arbitration Act which only relies on Arbitration to
solve a dispute.

N.B If a judge or a magistrate happens to have personal knowledge as facts in issue of a case, he or
she is legally required to disqualify himself from the proceeding to avoid bias

2
 THE RATIONALE OF JUDICIAL NOTICE

1. To save time and shorten a court proceeding, and have a reasonable length of a court and tribunal
proceeding. FOR EXAMPLE, no one is required to provide evidence that Monday follows Tuesday.
In HOLLAND VS JONES, Justice ISSACS Held that a Judicial Notice is a judicial shortcut the court
takes to save time since evidence is unnecessary.
2. Judicial Notice is invoked to relieve parties from having to prove facts that are not in dispute. Thus,
when a judicial notice is taken of a fact, no formal evidence of a fact must be introduced at the trial
or hearing.
3. Judicial notice gives rise to presumption that all reasonably intelligent person is aware of.
In the case of WOOLF VS WOOLF, It Is Presumed That a Man and a Woman Sharing A Bed While
Naked Are Likely To Have Sexual Intercourse.
In the case of THEAKER VS RICHARDSON The question was whether a husband can read a
letter of a wife on a normal course., it gives a presumption that husbands can read their wives
letters. A judicial notice was taken that husband reads the letters of the wives.

The judicial notice helps the courts or tribunals to reduce on the expenditure and resources on the course
of a proceeding.

FACTS JUDICIALLY NOTICED AFTER INQUIRY

INQUIRY in basic terms can mean research on a particular fact or topic into already existing sources.

N.B When we talk of facts judicially noticed after inquiry in other words these are material facts that were
commonly known generally to people but due to evolution of time they are known to a few people at a later
date.

There are facts commonly known to people but due to time evolvement they are ignored and forgotten by
people at that particular time.

In a common law case of MARY HOARE VS SILVER LOCK 1848 64CL pg. 624

In this case, the court was tasked with establishing whether the letter written by the defendant to the
plaintiff was Libel or not. In the letter the defendant had written that the plaintiff defrauded him for 10 to 12
years. On the first judgement, the court passed judgement on favour of the defendant but on appeal of the
case the ruling said it was libel so it went on the favour of the plaintiff. The court took a precedence of an
initial case where a word ``FROZEN SNAKE`` had been used to mean a person.

Usually, Judicial notice after inquiry is categorized into various sections: Political facts, historical and
professional practice.

3
This is done to prevent contradiction of the former laws and the current improved laws, and to create
harmony of the laws of the community and even the nation.

SECTION 56(3) OF THE EVIDENCE ACT CAP.6 States that if the court is called upon by any person to
take a judicial notice of any fact, it may fail to do so until that person produces such a Book or document as
it may consider necessary to enable it to do so.

In respect to statutory provisions above, the sources of inquiry may be the secretary of the state when it
comes to political matter; Historical matters may be from journals, textbooks as reference then finally
Professional practice can be obtained from common law practice and judicial precedence.

NB Once the court has taken a judicial notice, it does not need to be introduced in court by a witness or
another rule of evidence.

JUDICIAL NOTICE ON POLITICAL MATTERS

The law requires a court to take a judicial notice of constitutional matters without the need to prove by
evidence.

In regards to SECTION 56(1)(g) OF EVIDENCE ACT.CAP 6, The existence of title and the national flag of
a government, the court may take a judicial notice of hostilities, wars and conflicts involving Uganda which
are known to every person generally.

In DUFF DEVELOPMENT CO.LTD VS KALANTAN(MALAYSIA) (1924) 2 ALLER In DUFF

DEVELOPMENT CO.LTD VS KELANTAN GOVERNMENT (MALASYIA) (1924) 2ALL E.R, Lord Summer
suggested that in the absence of a clear statement of the position of the government ,the court may be
entitled to decide whether the defendant had the benefit of the state immunity for itself on the basis of the
evidence before it.The facts of this case is that, The malaysian government entered into a mining contract
with DUFF CO . LTD. The Arbitration act stated that incase a foreign company was in dispute with the
government, the dispute had to be resolved with using (A.D.R) Alternative dispute resolution .Breach of the
contract ensued and DUFF CO.LTD went to court .The court took a judicial notice based on statutory
provisions of Arbitration Act which only relies on Arbitration to solve a dispute.

The legal issue was whether the independent sovereign state was subject to international law to the
immunity against legal process.

1. A foreign state cannot be impleaded in the English courts without its consent.

4
2. Lord cave added that in regards to the state immunity, it is the duty of the court to accept the
statement of the secretary of the state thus clearly and positively made as conclusive upon the
point.

HISTORICAL FACTS OF A JUDICIAL NOTICE

On historical facts of a judicial notice, a court might consider Historical aspects of a subject matter
before the court if the history is well known to the public and needs not be proved.

N.B The law allows a judge to rely on his own historical knowledge in such a case with a historical fact
in issue.
This is in respect to SECTION 56(2) OF THE EVIDENCE ACT. CAP6 which states that, in all the cases
and matters of public history and literature, science or art, the court may resort for its aid to appropriate
books or documents of reference.

In the case of READING VS THE BISHOP OF LINCOLN(1889)

The issue was whether mixing Communal Wine and water and other practices was contrary to the
Laws of the church. The Judge took
a judicial notice of the Historical fact of the church mixing water with wine as a historical religious
practice of the church since the 19TH Century.

CUSTOMS OF JUDICIAL NOTICE

A custom is a tradition or ethics which govern the relationship between members of a community.

The general rule is that a court cannot treat a fact as proved on the basis of the evidence in a previous
case.

A custom is regarded to as a question of fact or upon inquiry and therefore must be proved either
by Judicial Notice or by evidence as provided by statutory provisions of
SECTION 56(2) OF EVIDENCE ACT. CAP 6.

N.B It should be noted that for a custom to be judicially noticed it should have become notorious for
appearing before the courts. In
ODONGO & ANOTHER VS OJERA, The Respondent sued the appellant on the claims that he was the
rightful customary owner of a piece of land approximately 100 acres .The court Held that , on the
issue of Acholi customs of inheritance, the court took a judicial notice that the customs the respondent
was relying on was neither documented nor of such notoriety as would have been justified, thus the
court took a judicial notice of it , since the respondent had failed to prove the custom.

5
STATUTORY PROVISIONS OF JUDICIAL NOTICE

SECTION 56 (1) (a) OF EVIDENCE ACT CAP. 6 states that Acts of parliament of Uganda and
ordinances enacted or hereafter to be enacted and in all the acts of parliament of the United Kingdom
are heretofore in force in Uganda.

In SALEH VS REPUBLIC (1950) 20 EACA, In regards to SECTION 56(1) (A) E.A.U CAP.6,The
appellant was convicted of an offence under section 5 of the Sugar Ordinance at that time .The
magistrate took a judicial notice on the fact that the appellant was found in possession of sugar on a
prohibited location. On appeal, it was argued that a notice published in a gazette for purpose of sugar
ordinance and regulation had not been issued publishing on time by the Governor.
HELD, the court took a judicial notice of all ordinances and regulations enacted in Kenya.

In SINGH VS REPUBLIC (1951) In this case, it was observe red that the court must take a judicial
notice of a government notice issued under the Defense regulation of 1948.

CONSTITUTIONAL MATTERS OF JUDICIAL NOTICE

According to SECTION 56(1)(c) Of The Evidence Act. Cap 6, it states that the course of proceedings of
the parliament of the council or other authorities for the purpose of making laws and regulations
established under any law for the time being relating to.

The court must take a judicial notice of the following constitutional matters;

 Matters relating to public administration.

 Proceedings of parliament and other institutions.
 Ascension into office by public officers.
 The existence of any title, Flag, Functions and public holidays. Based on SECTION 56(1) (g)OF
EVIDENCE ACT CAP.6

In Exparte Matovu Oyor Francis Vs olanya MARTIN GULU CIVIL APPEAL NO. 5 OF 2017. It was
Held that According to SECTION 56(1) OF EVIDENCE ACT CAP.6, A Court may take a judicial notice
on the commencement, continuance and termination of Hostilities between the government of Uganda
and other states or body or a person. The court took a Judicial notice of the fact that since 2004 there
had been Rebel activities deliberately in entire Northern Uganda region due to (L.R.A), therefore the
trial judge was convinced to take a judicial notice sighting the general knowledge on the existence of
hostility of rebels of (L.R.A).

6
THEORATICAL QUESTIONS OF A JUDICIAL NOTICE

This comes through the practice of judicial notice in regards to reception of evidence. This is when a
judge or magistrate gives a ruling based on his or her knowledge.
In MIFUMI UGANDA LTD. VS ATTORNEY GENERAL AND ANOTHER CONST.APPEAL NO. 2
OF2014 [2015] UGSC 13 The petitioner took to ask the court to declare the marriage custom of
demanding the bride price and refund of bride price in case the marriage breaks down
unconstitutionally.

The court concluded by finding out that the court judges erred when they ruled that they could not take
a judicial notice as to the matter of customary marriage since bride price has been a practice of most
customs in Uganda.

4. CONCLUSION

In conclusion therefore, based on the case of HOLLAND VS JONES, Justice Isaacs Stated that a
Judicial Notice is a Judicial Shortcut the court takes on certain matters that are so notorious and well
known and clearly established.