In the immediate case, the academic article is not within the
scope of an adjudicative fact that can be proven by judicial notice.
 Relying on rule 37.10 and focusing on the words “or other
material”, Mr. Monk, however, submits that the academic article
may be included in the motion material as other material. How-
ever, Mr. Monk’s argument was rejected by Justice Trainor in
Warren Industrial Feldspar Co. Ltd. v. Union Carbide Canada
Ltd.15, at para. 36, where he stated:
The plaintiff [who was responding to a motion for security for costs] takes
the position that rules 37.06(c), 37.10(3) and 37.10(4) provide for the admis-
sibility of documentary evidence, on a motion, otherwise than by affidavit.
The plaintiff argues that documentary evidence not included in an affidavit
will be admissible on a motion if it is included in the plaintiff’s motion record.
I cannot accept this argument. The proper practice, in adducing documentary
evidence on a motion, is to exhibit the documents to an affidavit or to intro-
duce the document into evidence upon the examination or cross-examination
of a witness pursuant to rule 39.03. Although there are various statutory pro-
visions allowing certain documents to be proved by the use of a certified copy,
absent such a provision, documents should be proved by affidavit or oral evi-
dence and cannot be simply filed with the court for use on a motion.
 Although Justice Trainor articulated the point too narrowly,
I agree with him that including a document in a notice of motion
does not make the document ipso facto “other material” and
admissible or usable on the motion. Justice Trainor’s point was
that for evidentiary material to be included in a motion record as
other material it still must be proven, admissible, or useable in
accordance with a statutory provision, an express rule, or a common law rule. Justice Trainor’s comment was narrow because he
did not refer to common law rules and practices.
 Rule 37.10(2)(e) refers to “any other material in the court
file that is necessary for the hearing of the motion”, and this rule
explains why on a pleadings motion, for instance, the pleadings
could be included in the notice of motion without a covering affidavit. The charts used on a refusal’s motion would seem to be
another example of “other material” under rule 37.10 as would an
agreed statement of facts be “other material”. Exhibits that are not
attached to an affidavit but referred to would fall within the words
“other material”. Exhibits that are marked on examinations for
discovery and cross-examinations are “other material”.
at para. 53; R. v. Perkins, supra, at para. 38; R. v. Sutherland,  O.J.
No. 4736, 2016 ONCA 674, at para. 35.
15 (1986), 54 O.R. (2d) 213,  O.J. No. 2364 (S.C.J.). See, also, Sahara
Lawyer Professional Corp. v. Menon,  O.J. No. 4376, 2016 ONSC 5185
(S.C.J.), at para. 21.