Judicial Notice

What is judicial notice?

Judicial notice or judicial cognisance is defined as follows:

“Judicial notice refers to facts which a judge can be called upon to receive act to act upon either from his general knowledge of them or from inquiries to be made by himself for his own information from sources to which it is proper for him to refer.”

What this means is that the court can actually take certain facts that are well known to the courts or general public as a whole on its face value without the need for the fact to be proved or disproved by the parties in court.  

When can a judge raise the term “judicial notice” in court?

Section 57 of the Evidence Act (“the Act”) contains a list of facts which judge can take judicial notice without the need for parties to prove the facts. For example:

1. A judge can take judicial notice of the fact that the Yang di-Pertuan Agong and the Ruler of the State in Malaysia have ascended to their respective throne and the validity of the appointment of the Yang di-Pertua Negeri in their respective state.
2. A judge can take judicial notice of the validity of the seals:
   1. That is used by the courts of Malaysia;
   2. That is used by any person authorised by any law in Malaysia;
   3. Seals that English Courts take judicial notice; 
   4. Seals that are used by Courts of Admiralty and Maritime; and
   5. Seals that are used by public notaries. 
3. A judge can take judicial notice of the appointment of any person to any public offices in Malaysia provided that the appointment is notified in the Federal or State Gazette.
4. A judge can take judicial notice of the fact that Malaysia is hostile towards certain countries, body or person. 
5. A judge can also take judicial notice of:
   1. The different time zones between countries;
   2. The geographical division of the world;
   3. The meaning of Malay or English word; and
   4. The public festivals, holidays, and fasts are notified in the Federal or State Gazette.

Can a judge take judicial notice of what is not written in the Act?

Yes. The courts have repeatedly mentioned that just because a fact is not listed in section 57 of the Act does not mean that the court cannot take judicial notice of it. The courts further noted that:

1. For the facts that are listed in section 57, the court has no discretion and must take judicial notice of the facts; and
2. The test to determine whether the courts can take judicial notice of a fact is that the fact involved must be “sufficiently notorious” that it becomes proper to assume its existence without proof. 

Examples

In Khem Singh v Anokh Singh, the court took judicial notice of the fact that a  marriage brokerage agreement is illegal and that whatever contract or agreement that is agreed between the parties in consideration of the marriage (even though on the face value it is a valid contract) will be tainted with illegality as well.

In Lembaga Lebuhraya Malaysia v Semenyih Jaya Sdn Bhd, the court took judicial notice of the fact that Lembaga Lebuhraya Malaysia is a governing body authorised to deal with all matters pertaining to highways in Malaysia (In this instance, Lembaga Lebuhraya Malaysia has lodged an objection against the award given by the Land Administrator to Semenyih Jaya for acquiring Semenyih Jaya’s land to build a highway because the amount of compensation awarded was deemed to be excessive). 

In Lonpac Insurance Bhd v Medan Damai Sdn Bhd, the court took judicial notice of the fact that rainfall is common in the Klang Valley and more so during the monsoon season.

The information provided on this website does not, and is not intended to, constitute legal advice; instead, all information, content, and materials available on this site are for general informational purposes only. Information on this website may not constitute the most up-to-date legal or other information. For further inquiries, please email us at general@mathews.my.