Header Ads

What is a judicial admission?


Sec. 4. Judicial admissions. - An admission, verbal or written, made by a party in the course of the proceedings in the same case, does not require proof. The admission may be contradicted only by showing that it was made through palpable mistake or that no such admission was made. (Rule 129, Rules of Court)


What is a judicial admission?

A judicial admission is an admission, verbal or written, made by a party in the course of the proceedings in the same case, which dispenses with the need for proof with respect to the matter or fact admitted. (Manuel Ybiernas et al. vs. Ester Tanco-Gabaldon, G.R. No. 178925, June 1, 2011)


Requisites for judicial admission:
  1. Made by a party
  2. In the course of the proceedings
  3. In the same case

What are the effects of judicial admission?

●  A judicial admission may not be contradicted by the party making it. As the party making such judicial admission is bound by it, he is deemed in estoppel. Therefore, a party making an admission cannot during the trial deny what has been earlier admitted nor present evidence which will run counter against the admission.

●  An admission in a pleading on which a party goes to trial is conclusive against him unless the court allows the pleader to withdraw, explain or modify it if it appears to have been made by improvidence or mistake or that no such admission was made.


How may judicial admission be contradicted?

The admission may be contradicted only by showing that:
  1. it was made through palpable mistake or
  2. no such admission was made

How judicial admissions are made
  1. verbally or in writing
  2. expressly or impliedly

●  Judicial admissions may be verbal or those verbally made in the course of the trial or they may be written, such as those stated in a pleading. They may be express or implied, implied admissions by a defendant of material facts alleged in a complaint include:
  1. keeping silent on such material facts,
  2. denying such material facts without setting forth the matters upon which he relies to support his denial, and
  3. asserting lack of knowledge or information of the truth of the material allegations when the same is plainly and necessarily within the knowledge of defendant.

Instances of Judicial admissions:

1. The genuineness and due execution of an actionable document copied or attached to a pleading, when the other party fails to specifically deny under oath (Rule 8 §8)

2. Material allegations in the complaint, when the other party fails to specifically deny it (Rule 8 §11)

3. Admissions in superseded pleadings, when offered in evidence (Rule 10 §8)

4. Act, declaration, or omission of a party as to a relevant fact (Rule 130 §26)

5. Implied admission of guilt in an offer of compromise by the accused in criminal cases, except quasi-offenses and those allowed by law to be compromised (Rule 130 §27)

6. Admission by silence (Rule 130 §32)

7. Pre-trial admission in civil cases. (Rule 18 §7)

8. Pre-trial admission in criminal cases where the admission was reduced to writing and signed by the accused and his counsel (Rule 118 §2 and 4)


Judicial admission made in another case or court

●  To be considered as a judicial admission, the same must be made in the same case in which it is offered. If made in another case or in another court, the fact of such admission must be proved as in the case of any other fact, although if it was made in a judicial proceeding, it is entitled to greater weight. (Bagsa vs. Nagramada, 11 Phil 174, In re Estate of Mijares de FariƱas, 13 Phil 63)

●  Thus, judicial admissions made in one case are admissible at the trial of another case provided they are proved and are pertinent to the issue involved in the latter, unless
  1. the said admissions were made only for purposes of the first case, as in the rule on implied admissions and their effects under Rule 26.
  2. the same were withdrawn with the permission of the court therein.
  3. the court deems it proper to relieve the party therefrom. (20 Am. Jur 470 as cited in Florenz D. Regalado, Remedial Law Compendium, Volume II, 2004, page 791)

Judicial admissions vs. extrajudicial admissions

Judicial admissions are conclusive upon the party making them, while extrajudicial admissions or other admissions are, as a rule, and where the elements of estoppel are not present, disputable.


Cases:
Lucido v. Calupitan, 27 Phil. 48 (1914)
Torres v. CA, 131 SCRA 24 (1984)

● An admission, verbal or written, made by party in the course of the proceedings ion the same case does not require proof. It maybe made:

(a) In the pleadings filed by the parties;
(b) In the course of the trial either by verbal or written manifestations or stipulations; or
(c) In other stages of judicial proceedings, as in the pre-trial of the case.

When made in the same case in which it is offered, ―no evidence is needed to prove the same and it cannot be contradicted unless it is shown to have been made through palpable mistake or when no such admission was made. The admission becomes conclusive on him, and all proof submitted contrary thereto or inconsistent therewith should be ignored, whether an objection is interposed by the adverse party or not (Republic v. Estate of Hans Menzi [2012]).


● The admission having been made in a stipulation of facts at pre-trial by the parties, it must be treated as a judicial admission. Under Section 24, Rule 129, a judicial admission requires no proof. The admission may be contradicted only b y a showing that it was made through palpable mistake or that no such admission was made. The Supreme Court cannot lightly set aside a judicial admission especially when the opposing party relied upon the same and accordingly dispensed with further proof of the fact already admitted. An admission made by a party in the course of the proceedings
does not require proof (Toshiba Information Equipment (Phils.), Inc. v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue [2010]). 


●A judicial admission conclusively binds the party making it, he cannot thereafter take a position contradictory to, or inconsistent with his pleadings. Acts or facts admitted do not require proof and cannot be contradicted unless it is shown that the admission was made through palpable mistake or that no such admission was made (Cahilig v. Hon. Terencio [2010]).


● The extrajudicial confession or admission of one accused is admissible only against said accused, but is inadmissible against the other accused. But if the declarant or admitter repeats in court his extrajudicial admission, during the trial and the other accused is accorded the opportunity to cross-examine the admitter, the admission is admissible against both accused because then it is transposed into a judicial admission (Enriquez v. Sandiganbayan [2012])


● Judicial admissions are cannot be contradicted by the admitter who is the party and binds the person who makes the same, and absent any showing that this was maden thru palpable mistake or that no such admission was made, no amount of realization can offset it (Sps. Manzanilla v. Waterfields Industries Corporation [2014]).


● Judicial admissions are legally binding on the party making the admissions. Pre-trial admission in civil cases is one the instances of judicial admissions explicitly provided for under Section 7, Rule 18, which mandates that the contents of the pre-trial order shall control the subsequent course of the action, thereby, defining and limiting the issues to be tried. Under Section 4, Rule 129 of the Rules of Court, a judicial admission requires no proof (Eastern Shipping Lines, Inc. v, BPI/MS Insurance Corporation [2015])


Read:
Admission vs. Confession

No comments

Powered by Blogger.