Yes No Share to Facebook
Taking Judicial Notice
The Acceptance of Alleged Facts As True Without Evidence
Does a Judge Always Need Proof That a Fact Is True?
The Principle of Judicial Notice Allows a Judge to Accept a Fact As True Where the Fact Is So Notoriously As True and Uncontroversial That Evidence Is Unnecessary.
Understanding the Principle Known As Taking Judicial Notice Without Evidence of Notoriously Known Truths
There are facts that are so notoriously known as true that anyone with common knowledge would agree that the fact is true. In such a circumstance, a court may accept the fact as true, by taking judicial notice of the fact, without requiring any proof of the fact. Examples of notoriously known facts include knowledge that the Earth is round, and the Sun is bright.
The Law
The legal requirements for review before a judge takes judicial notice of a fact were well explained within the Taylor v. Hanley Hospitality Inc., 2022 ONCA 376, case wherein it was stated:
[30] The concept of judicial notice allows a court to receive “facts” that are “so notorious or uncontroversial that evidence of their existence is unnecessary”. This does not allow parties “to put before the court controversial evidence to the prejudice of the opposing party without providing a proper opportunity for its truth to be tested”: Public School Boards’ Assn. of Alberta v. Alberta (Attorney General), 2000 SCC 2, [2000] 1 S.C.R. 44, at para. 5. The threshold for judicial notice is strict since the facts are not proved by evidence under oath nor tested by cross-examination: R. v. Find, 2001 SCC 32, [2001] S.C.R. 863, at para. 48.
Per the Taylor case shown above, a court may take judicial notice and accept a fact as true when the fact is so commonly known and uncontroversial that proof of the fact is unnecessary.
Summary Comment
The taking of judicial notice involves a court accepting certain facts as true without the need of evidentiary proof and involves things so commonly known.