R V Luffe (1867) 9 EAST 193

Material Facts:

There was an issue concerning the legitimacy of a child. It was clear that the man had been away and only returned two weeks (a forth night) before the birth of the child.

Ratio Decidendi:

The court took judicial notice of the fact that a man who only has sexual intercourse with his wife two weeks before the birth of a child cannot be the father of the child. Per Lord Bollenborough,

…In nature, the fact may certainly be known that the husband, who had no access until within a fortnight of his wife's delivery, could not be the actual father of the child. Where the thing cannot certainly be known, we must call in aid such probable evidence as can be resorted to, and the intervention of a jury must, in all cases in which it is practicable, be had to decide thereupon ; but where the question arises as it does here, and where it may certainly be known from the invariable course of nature, as in this case it may, that no birth could be occasioned and produced within those limits of time, we may venture to lay down the rule plainly and broadly, without any danger arising from the precedent.

Le Blano J. also noted that:

Where it can be demonstrated to be absolutely impossible, in the course of nature, that the husband could be the father of the child, it does not break in upon the reason of the current of authorities, to say that the issue is illegitimate.

Principle in Case:

Judicial notice may be taken on the ground of natural impossibility.