Judicial admissions Flashcards
def of judicial admission
admissions made part of the legal proceedings that are binding on the party and no need for proof. NB// should be distinguished from extra-judicial admissions that require proof
adversarial approach
no need to prove a matter submitted by another party must be formal confession.
lee v NCB
any judicial admission must be taken subject to any explanation/ qualification
civil evidence s.8
action concerning family relationships: s.8(1)no decree or judgement in favour of the pursuer shall be pronounced until the grounds have been established by evidence
s. 8(2) s8(1) above applies to divorce ect…
s. 8(3) any action of nullity of marriage shall consist of evidence other than that of a party to the marriage
admissions on record the process of written pleadings in CIVIL
open record. adjustment and closed record.
Jackson v Glasgow CIVIL
admissions in closed record are binding and do not need to be proved by evidence. this even applies in later cases against party making an admission
Open record CIVIL
written assertions by the claimant. these are submitted by the court the defender will either admit or deny accusations.
defender will submit their own averments.
open record will build up the case. any admission isn’t binding. any admission is qualified by until there is a closed record.
once parties happy then it is binding and written pleadings are closed
implied admission CIVIL
party does not expressly deny a fact within his knowledge is deemed to have admitted it. even where the pleadings say “not admitted”
Galbreith v central motor engineering co CIVIL
A accused B of disponing an item whilst sequestered. it was never denied by A. court held as A had faild to deny = impliedly admitted.
clark v clark CIVIL
implied admissions: every statement of fact shall be answered by every other party. if such a statement is within the knowledge of another party and not denied. then it shall be deemed to have admitted the statement of fact.
convey v Kirkwood CIVIL
can make an admission after the record has closed, for use only in consistorial actions, made by one or both of the parties. these are JOINT minutes. agreed on by both parties.
Joint minutes CIVIL
where parties agree to s.11 order, aliment of child an order for financial provision.
entered into when to express agreement. sheriff grants the decree.
notices to admit CIVIL
at any time the record has closed a party may intimate to any other party a notice calling on him to admit for the purposes of that clause only:
facts in averred in pleadings ID in notice.
Process for lodging doc: authenticated doc ect.
within 21 days party has not intimate non admission.
if do not within 21 days then will be deemed to accept the fact unless the sherrif on special clause directs otherwise.
oral admission CIVIL
treated as formal admissions
CRIMINAL Guilty plea
accepted by the crown not withdrawn until conclusive against the accused
crim justice act 1995 s.146(8)
it shall not be necessary for the prosecutor to establish a charge or part of a charge to which the accused pleads guilty.
mclean v HM Adv (CRIM)
where a guilty plea is not accepted or withdrawn: plead guilty on assult charge but element of consent was dropped. the prosecution wanted orginal charge. sherrif accepted the def guilty plea. ON appeal held s plea of guilty if not accepted by the pros will not proceed
walsh v HM adv
guilty plea one of several charges (solemn) Jury made aware of guilty pleas for other offences that were not before the court at the time court held other offences QUASHED
McColl v skeen
Summary case guilty pleas several charges. no jury. sherrif was entitled to have regard to partial guilty plea IF RELEVENT TO CHARGES. case was for forged MOT. had been found guilty of driving without MOT. sherrif entitled to hear the guilty plea as it was relevant.
CRIM 1995 ACT s.256 (1)
parties agree on evidence not in contention:
in any trial it shall not be necessary for the accussed or pros:
a prove a fact admitted by the other
prove a doc that is not in dispute between them
s.256 (2) 1995 act
admission or agreement shall be lodged with the clerk of court
admission will be submitted by counsel/ sol
agreement admitted by sol/council
s.256(3) 1995 act
where a fact is lodged and signed and agreed will be deemed to have been duly proved.
s.257 1995 act
duty to agree evidence in matter of dispute
s.257(1) 1995 act
pros and accused shall id facts which are
a) seeking to prove
b) unlikely to be disputed
c) in proof that he does not wish to lead oral evidence.
without prejudice to s.258 they shall take all reasonable steps to secure an agreement of the other party.
s.257(2) 1995 act
s.257(1) does not apply if accused is not legally represented
s.257(4) 1995 act
facts to be id
high court pre preliminary hearing
sheriff court pre first diet
s. 258 1995 act
allows a party to be proactive in this regard serve statements
s.258(2ZA) 1995
s.258(1) have to serve a statement of facts, which would normally have to prove, but are unlikely to be disputed, within a relevant period. relevant period = summary 7days if not done within 7days (conclusively proved)
in any other case 14 days
s.258(2A) the relevant diet= high court prelim hearing, summary intermediate diet
other case the trial diet
COURT, THE FIRST DIET
s.258(3) 1995 act
unless any other party serves on the first party, no MORE than 7 days after the date. (unless the court grants special circumstances for time extension)
the facts specified shall be deemed to be proved.
s.258(4) 1995 act
if unchallenged notice shall be deemed to be proved.
ss.4( A)if a challenge is made 48hrs pre diet then it shall be DISREGARDED
relevant diet is same as before .. high court pre lim
HOWEVER, (4C/D)COURT may allow time limit to be passed if cause shown
S.258(5) 1995 ACT
ss.3+4 do not prevent a person from leading said evidence if FACT REFERRED to in statement
ashif v HM ADV
challenge was made to provisions on the basis that it denied the accused the right to a fair trial (right to silence) art 6 contention rejected
Evans v Wilson
strictness in interpretations admission failure of crown to admit doc = meant later quashed conviction
Owens v HM ADV
def plead self defence. pros argued: certain types of evidence = implied admission thus no need to show actus reus. court accepted. lecturer= the plea of self defence does not relieve the crown of having to prove all elements of the crime.
