Anda di halaman 1dari 18


-Evidence is not an end it itself but a means of ascertaining the truth
-Purpose of evidence is to know the truth= not the actual truth but the JUDICIAL OR LEGAL TRUTH.
o Ex. Court wont consider evidence not formally offered even if gospel truth and will
acquit accused
-Applies only to JUDICIAL proceedings. Inapplicable in NICOLE (Sec 4, Rule 1) except by analogy or in
suppletory character
o Naturalization cases
o Insolvency proceedings
o Cadastral proceedings
o Other cases not provided for
o Land registration cases
o Election cases
-GR: Admin agencies like Board of medicine, CSC, not bound by technical rules of evidence. Same goes
for labor cases. They can choose to give weight or disregard evidence depending on trustworthiness.

Admissible Evidence= Relevant Evidence + Competent Evidence

a. Relevant evidence- test of relevance is logic and competence; discretionary on the part of the
- The immediate fact proven must have a connection to the ultimate issue
- GR: Collateral matters are not allowed as they do no have direct relevance to issue of
o Exception:
A collateral matter may be admitted if it tends in any reasonable degree to establish
the probability or improbability of the fact in issue (Sec 4, R128)
Evidence of Character
o S51, R130
o S51(b), R130
o S14, R132
- Evidence on the credibility of the witness or the lack of it is ALWAYS relevant
since it has inherent tendency to prove or disprove the truthfulness of assertion,
and therefore, probative value of proffered evidence
o The adverse party is allowed to test credibility thru cross-examination
NOT limited to matters taken up in direct examination. Can include
other matters to test accuracy of witness.
Except: (limited to matters subj of d.e.)
Accused may testify as witness on his own behalf but
subject to CE on matters covered by DE (S 1d, R115)
A hostile witness impeached and CE but CE limited to
matters covered by DE (S12, R132)

b. Competent evidence- one that is not excluded by laws or rules

- Competence generally refers to eligibility of evidence to be received as such.
- But when applied to witness, term competent refers to qualification of the witness
(eligibility of witness to take stand and testify)
- To object on the ground that evidence is not competent, specify ground for incompetence
i.e. hearsay, leading, parol. INVALID ground: Incompetent as this is a general objection.

-Admissibility refers to question of won evidence is to be considered at all; consider relevance and
-Probative value- won evidence proves an issue; depends on judicial evaluation within guidelines

Principle of multiple admissibility when evidence is admissible for one purpose but admissible
for another purpose or vice versa.
-hence, the reason why the purpose for which the evidence is offered must be specified
-i.e. evidence can be offered both as object and documentary evidence

Conditional admissibility this is when relevance of evidence is not apparent at the time it is
offered but its relevance may be seen when connected to other pieces of evidence which are yet to be
-To do this, proponent may ask court that evidence be conditionally admitted in the
meantime subject to the condition that he is going to establish relevancy and competency at
a later time. If not shown as promised, adverse party can by motion move to strike it out
from the record.

Doctrine of Curative admissibility allows a party to introduce otherwise inadmissible evidence
to answer the opposing partys previous introduction of inadmissible evidence if it would remove
any unfair prejudice caused by the admission of the earlier inadmissible evidence
-Doctrine only applies when the other party OBJECTED to the offering of the inadmissible
evidence AND the court INCORRECTLY overruled the objection. Failure to object would be
deemed waiver of inadmissibility and hence, admissible.

Direct evidence vs Circumstantial evidence
-Direct evidence proves a fact without the need to make an inference from another fact
-Circumstantial evidence or indirect evidence is that evidence which indirectly proves fact in issue
thru an inference drawn from the evidence established
- Accused can be convicted on the basis of circumstantial evidence provided the ff. concur:
a. there is more than one circumstance
b. the facts from which the inferences are derived are proven
c. the combination of all the circumstances is such as to prove a conviction beyond
reasonable doubt
-Guidelines in the appreciation of circumstantial evidence:
1. it should be acted upon with caution
2.All the essential facts must be consistent with the hypothesis of guilt
3.The facts must exclude every other theory but that of guilt
4. The facts must establish such certainty of guilty of the accused as to convince the judge
beyond reasonable doubt that the accused is the one who committed the offense

Cumulative evidence and Corroborative evidence
-Cumulative evidence refers to evidence of the same kind and character as that already given and
tends to prove the same proposition
i.e. witness A and B both saw X shooting Y
-Corroborative evidence refers to evidence that is supplementary to that already given tending to
strengthen or confirm it. It is usually of a different type from that previously offered but which tends
to prove the same fact.
i.e. Witness A saw X singing the document. X denies this. Witness B handwriting expert says
that signature is indeed that of X.
-Corroborative evidence is not always required.
-Testimony of sole eyewitness is sufficient to support a conviction for as long as it clear,
straightforward and wroth of credence. Witnesses are to be weighed, not numbered.
-Rule on Examination of Child Witness: Testimony of child is credible by itself and sufficient
to support finding of fact
Except: when expressly mandated in determining the value and credibility of evidence

Positive and negative evidence
-Positive: The witness affirms that a fact did or did not occur.
-Negative: The witness states that he did not see or know of the occurrence of a fact.

- Generally, a positive testimony normally enjoys more weight that negative testimony
- Denial is negative evidence. Denial and alibi are negative evidence. They are generally
referred as self-serving evidence
- Denial is the weakest defenses and can never overcome a positive testimony particularly
when it comes from a credible witness
- Alibi is inherently weak and must be rejected when the identity of the accused is
satisfactorily and categorically established by the eyewitness, especially when eyewitness
has no motive to testify falsely
o For defense of alibi to proper and be admissible, he must show by positive, clear and
satisfactory proof that:
He was at a different place during the commission of the crime
It was physically impossible for him due to the distance and the facility of
access (consider won there was vehicle, etc) between the scene of the
crime and where he says he was when crime was committed

Competency of witness v Credibility of witness
-Credibility means believeability
-After competence of witness is allowed, the consideration of his credibility follows
-A witness may be competent yet give incredible testimony. He may be incompetent yet his evidence
if received is perfectly credible
-Guidelines when confronted with the issue of the credibility of witnesses on appeal:
a. The Court gives highest respect to the RTCs evaluation of the testimony
of witness because of its unique position in directly observing he demeanor of the witnesses
on stand.
b. Absent any substantial reason i.e. when court overlooked or arbitrarily disregarded
significant facts and circumstances to justify reversal of the RTCs assessment and
conclusion, reviewing court is generally bound by lower courts findings
c. This rule more stringently applied when CA concurs with the RTC

-In prosecutions for rape, youth and immaturity are generally badges of truth and sincerity. This is
because no young woman would concoct a story of defloration, allow an examination of her private
party and subject herself to public trial if only to obtain justice for the wrong committed against her.
Childs testimony have consistently been assigned full weight and credence. Sole testimony of rape
victim if credible natural, convincing, and consistent with human nature suffices to convict.

-Not enough to invoke ratio above to convict rapist. To succeed, prosecution must also show
that complainants story is believable independently of the presumption. (in line with
accuseds presumption of innocence)

-A community tax receipt is not credible and reliable in proving identity of person who wishes to
have document notarized.

-Minor inconsistencies between in narration of facts of witnesses do not detract from their
credibility. Settled that discrepancies between statements in affidavit and those made in open court
do not discredit the witness since ex parte affidavits are generally incomplete. Testimony in open
court is more important.
-IN fact, discrepancies in minor details are a badge of veracity as this shows that testimony
has not been rehearsed or concocted.

-Delay in reporting the crime does not discredit the witness. Court takes judicial notice of the natural
reluctance of witness to get involved in criminal case due to the fear of reprisal. Witnesses react
differently to situations.

Prima facie vs. Conclusive evidence
-Prima facie is that which, standing alone, unexplained or un-contradicted, is sufficient to maintain a
-Conclusive- Class of evidence which the law does not allow to be contradicted.

Burden of proof vs burden of evidence
Burden of proof is the obligation of a party to present evidence on the facts in issue necessary to
establish his claim or defense by the amount of evidence required by law; while burden of evidence
is the duty of a party to go forward with the evidence to overthrow any prima facie presumption
against him.

Does not shift, Shifts during trial,
remains on the party depending on exigencies
upon whom it is of the case
Determined by Determined by
pleadings filed by the developments at trial or
party by provisions of law
(presumptions, judicial
notice, admissions)

Falsus in uno, falsus in omnibus
-false in one thing, false in everything
-Requisites for doctrine to apply:
a. Testimony of witness is on a material issue
b. Testimony must be willfully false and given with an intention to deceive
-not an absolute rule and not strictly applied in PH jurisdiction. In fact, rarely applied here. It only
deals with weight of evidence.
-Modern trend favors flexibility when testimony may be partly believed and partly
disbelieved depending on the corroborative evidence presented at trail

-for claim to prosper, the defense must adduce clear and convincing evidence to overcome the
presumption that government officials performed duties in a regular and proper manner. But this
does NOT shift the burden of proof in criminal case as it is still the prosecution who has such burden
-this defense is not looked upon with favor due to its being conveniently concocted ; inherently weak

Flight or non-flight of accused
GR: Flight is indicative of guilt, but non-fight is not necessarily indicative of innocence.
-non-flight per se is not conclusive proof of innocence.
-The wicked flees even when no man pursues, but the righteous stands fast as bold as a lion.

-What is known need not be proved
-function is to abbreviate litigation. Judicial notice is a substitute for formal proof of evidence

a.When mandatory
- Court must take judicial notice of decision that the SC has previously rendered
-law of nations mandatory since under the Conti, the PH adopts the generally accepted principle
of international law as part of the land. Since it is in effect in the nature of local law, so must be
subject to mandatory judicial notice
-power of the president to reorganize the executive department

b.When discretionary
-subject to courts wisdom and discretion. Courts must exercise with caution
-Exercise with caution especially in expropriation cases
i.e Courts cannot take judicial notice of the very valuation of the property if such is
the VERY ISSUE in the case at bar. The market value, which is one of the bases for
determining just compensation, cannot be arbitrarily arrived at without considering
other relevant factors. Court must allow parties to prevent evidence thereon instead
of assuming a valuation without basis.
-common knowledge the test is notoriety
-Facts which are universally known or found in encyclopedias and publications are judicially
noticed IF they are of such universal notoriety and so generally understood that they are
regarded as forming part of common knowledge
-capable of unquestionable demonstration fields of professional and scientific knowledge
-ought to be known by judges because of their judicial functions judicial notice is not judicial
-The mere personal knowledge of a judge is NOT the judicial knowledge of the court. He is
not authorized to make his individual knowledge of fact which is not generally or
professionally known as the basis of his action
- Conversely, a judge must take judicial notice of fact which is proepr subject of judicial
cognizance even if such fact is not within his personal knowledge (aka not well-read haha)

Foreign laws; Doctrine of Processual Presumption
GR: Court will NOT take judicial notice of foreign laws. Foreign laws must be alleged and proved.
Otherwise, foreign law will be presumed to be the same as the law of the jurisdiction hearing the
Exception: When the foreign law is part of a published treatise, periodical, or pamphlet and
the writer is recognized in his profession or calling as expert in the subject, the court, may
take judicial notice of the treatise containing the foreign law. (Sec 46, R 130)

Municipal ordinances
-MTCs should take judicial notice of the municipal ordinance in force in the municipality in which
they sit
-RTC should take JN of municipal ordinances in the municipalities within their jurisdiction
PROVIDED such is required by law i.e. charter of manila requires all courts sitting therein to take
judicial notice of all ordinances passed by the city council. Same applies even when RTC hears case on
-CA may take JN of municipal ordinances as there is no prohibition

Court actions and records
1.Same case: Court will take JN of own acts and records in same case
2. Other case: GR: Courts are not authorized to take JN of contents of records of other cases even
when such cases have been tried or are pending in the same court, and notwithstanding the fact that
both cases may been heard or are actually pending before the same judge
a. When in the absence of any objection, and with the knowledge of the opposing
party, the contents of said other case are clearly referred to by title and number in a
pending action and adopted or read into the record of the latter; or
b. When the original record of the other case or any part of it is actually withdrawn
from the archives at the courts discretion upon the request, or with the consent, of
the parties, and admitted as part of the records of the pending case.

-Proprietary acts of GOCCs cannot be taken judicial notice of since it cannot be considered official act
of exec department since it was entered into while performing proprietary function (i.e. entering into
management contract involving PPA)

-No JN of post office practices

-Courts take judicial notice of the practice of banks that they conduct background checks on
borrowers and sureties

-Courts take JN of the poor financial condition of the government; JN that court dockets are clogged

-Court can take JN of general increase in rentals in real estate. But the amount of rent may not be
determined by HN. Supporting evidence needed

-No JN of admin regulation or statute which is not yet effective

-Court should NOT take judicial notice of a rape victims age or relationship with the suspect.
Circumstances of minority and relationship are special qualifying circumstances which must be
alleged in the information and duly proven by prosecution. Improper even if defense admits,
acceding to prosecutions motion.
-As required under Section 3,E129, as to any other matters, such as age, hearing is required
before courts take JN of such fact.

-JN that business transaction may be made by individuals thru teleconferencing.

-JN that scene of the rape is not always necessarily isolate or secluded since lust is no respecter of
time or place.

-JN of Filipinas inbred modesty and shyness

-JN that persons kill without reason at all

-Court CANNOT be expected to take JN of address of law who moved or ascertain on its own if
counsel of record has been changed

-NO JN of persons address notwithstanding business in community

-JN of matter within locality where court sits. Can take JN of the address of the congressman of
locality since consti requires that a congressman must reside in in the district in which he shall be


1. The same must be made by a PARTY to the case
2. Must be made in the court of the proceedings in the SAME CASE
- If made in another case, it is extrajudicial admission
3. Verbal or written; Form is immaterial
4. Made either
a. In the pleadings
b. During the trail either by verbal or written manifestation
c. In other stages of the proceedings

Effect of judicial admission:
a. They do not require proof
b. They cannot be contradicted because they are conclusive upon the party making it
-court may reject evidence party adduces to contradict judicial admission made

NB: Despite the judicial admission, the court is still given leeway to consider other evidence
presented because admission may no t necessarily prevail over documentary evidence

How judicial admission contradicted
1.By showing that admission was made thru PALPABLE mistake
-mistake must be clear to the mind or plain to see
2. By showing that no SUCH admission was made
-when statement is taken out of context or was not made in the sense it was made to appear
by the other party

Admissions in pleadings and motions are judicial admission
-motion; answer

-Admissions in pleadings may either be:
a. Actual admission when party categorically admits
-Admissions in pre-trial of civil cases. (Pre-trial is mandatory) (S2(d),R18)
-Admissions in pre-trial of criminal cases PROVIDED:
i. reduced in writing; and
ii. signed by the accused and counsel (S2, R118)
Otherwise, cannot be used against the accused
-Admissions obtained thru depositions, written interrogatories

b. Admission inferred from failure to specifically deny the material allegation in other partys pleadings
(deemed admissions)
- Implied admission of allegations of usury (S11, R8)
- Implied admission of actionable documents (S8,R8)
- Implied admission when there is a request for admission (S1, S2,R26)
o NB: Admission pursuant to request for admission is for purpose of pending
action only (S3, R26)
o NB: This rule does not apply when stipulation of facts are made DURING
TRIAL When made in open court, stipulation of facts is automatically reduced
in writing and contained in official transcript of the court proceedings.
Conformity of accused in the form of signature is unnecessary since the lawyer
has prima facie authority to make relevant admissions by pleadings, by oral or
written stipulation, which unless allowed to be withdrawn, are conclusive.

-Hypothetical admission in a motion to dismiss A motion to dismiss hypothetically admits the truth
of the allegation of the complaint. Admission extends only to matters of facts sufficiently proven and
not to mere epithets charging fraud, allegation of legal conclusion or erroneous statement of law.
Only material allegation, not conclusions, are deemed admitted

-GR: Admission by counsel are conclusive upon client
Except: Where reckless or gross negligence of counsel deprive the client of due process of law or will
result in the outright deprivation of clients liberty or property.

Extrajudicial admissions:
a. Admission in drafted documents i.e. was supposed to be filed but not filed is merely an
extrajudicial admission, even if signed by party. If signed by counsel, not even an admission since
authority of lawyer to make statement for clients only extends to those made in open court or
pleading FILED in court
b. Admissions in superseded pleadings are ej admissions (see S8, R10)
c. Admissions in dismissed pleadings

-Object or real evidence is the thing itself which is involved in the case i.e. knife used to stab, ring
stolen, bullet shot consists of tangible things
-will enable the court to have a firsthand perception of the evidence instead of relying on the
recollection of witnesses
- Not limited to visual; covers entire range of sense like hearing, taste, smell i.e copyright
infringement case, court can listen to song to determine infringement
-Object evidence is evidence of the highest order and speaks more eloquently than witnesses put
-For the object evidence to be admissible, it must be relevant and competent.
a. The evidence must be relevant (test of logic; judicial discretion)
b. The evidence must be AUTHENTICATED(to be competent)
-to show that it is the real thing or the actual object claimed to be
c. The authentication must be made by a COMPETENT witness
-since object is inanimate and cannot speak for itself, there must be someone, a
WITNESS, who must identify the object to be the actual thing involved in the
-testimonial evidence provides the foundation for all types of evidence;
-witness must have actual and personal knowledge of the exhibit he is presenting
for admission since winess can only testify to facts within his personal knwoledge
d. The object must be formally OFFERED in evidence

-The right against self-incrimination cannot be invoke against object evidence since such the kernel
of the privilege is TESTIMONIAL compulsion
-Best evidence rule, parol evidence rule, hearsay rule are INAPPLICABLE

Demonstrative Evidence
-not the real thing but merely represents or demonstrates the real thing;
-not strictly REAL evidence because it is not the very thing involved in the case
-i.e. map (to indicate location and position of certain objects), photographs
-does not have its own category under the Rules but seems to be incorporated under the general
term object evidence
-admissibility depends on laying the proper foundation fr evidence: Does the evidence sufficiently
and accurately RERESENT the object it seeks to demonstrate or represent?
-Photographs Under Rules on evidence, photographic evidence of events, acts admissible provided
a. presented, displayed, and shown to court
b. shall be identified, explained or authenticated by either:
i. the person who made the recording;
ii. some other person competent to testify on the accuracy thereof

NB: The actual photographer need not be presented to authenticate. A witness who
is familiar with the scene portrayed or person portrayed and testifies that the photo
faithfully represents what is depicted is sufficient

NB: admissibility of photos subject to discretion of court
-Motion pictures and recordings- same rules for photos

-Tape recordings, witness should:
a. identify the speakers
b. state how he recognizes their voices ; and
c. that the recording was not taken in violation of the Anti-Wire Tapping Law

-VIEW When court makes an ocular inspection when a party cannot bring an object to court for
viewing; term used that refers to instances when the judge goes out of the courtroom to observe
places and objects;
-error for judge to do ocular inspection alone. Parties must be present or at least notified
since the inspection or view is part of trial

Categories of object evidence:
1. Object that have readily identifiable marks (unique objects)
-i.e. gun with serial number
2. Objects that are made readily available e (object made unique)
-i..e gun with serial number but witness can identify if he claims he made thing unique by
placing identifying marks on it like carving his initials on gun
3. Objects with no identifying marks and cannot be marked (non-unique objects)
-i.e. drugs, drop of oil,
-proponent must establish the chain of custody in order to guaranty the integrity and
evidentiary value of the physical evidence

Chain of custody rule under Dangerous Drugs Act (S21, Art II, RA 9165)
-Effect of non-compliance: (Note: Non-compliance will not render the drugs seized
inadmissible. But will affect the probative value or evidentiary merit of the seized items)
GR: The seizure and custody over said items will be rendered void and invalid
Except: Non-compliance is excused provided:
a. The non-compliance must be because of justifiable grounds; and
b. The apprehending officer/team must have properly preserved the integrity and
evidentiary value of the seized items

NB: there must be sufficient explanation given by prosecution; there must be a
showing the police officers intended to comply with procedure but was thwarted by
some justifiable grounds
-The absence of marked money from a buy-bust operation is NOT fatal as long as the sale of
dangerous dugs is adequately proven

DNA evidence
-People v Vallejo is the landmark case where SC declared that DNA evidence is admissible and
authoritative evidence
-Guidelines of court in assessing the probative value of DNA:
a. How the samples were collected
b. How they were handles
c. the possibility of contamination of samples
d. The procedure followed in analyzing the samples
e. The qualification of the analyst who conducted test

-People v. Yatar upheld the constitutionality of compulsory DNA testing

-The death of the defendant in a case for support and compulsory recognition wIll NOT bar the
conduct of DNA testing

-see Rule on DNA Evidence by SC (AM 06-11-05-SC)

Paraffin tests
-Generally inconclusive since unreliable.
-Presence of nitrates can come from substances other than gunpowder like tobacco, fireworks,
fertilizers, explosives; absence does not show
-absence does not conclusively show that accused did not fire gun since possible that he thoroughly
washed his hands; or used a glove

Polygraph test (lie detector tests)
-uniformly rejected the results; not yet attained scientific acceptance


-Two categories of documents of evidence:
a. writings
b. any other material containing modes of written expression

-Being writings or materials containing modes of written expression does NOT ipso facto make them
documentary evidence. They have to be offered as proof of their contents.
-if offered for some other purpose like their existence, fact of execution, or condition, it
would be merely object evidence

-Best evidence rule, parol evidence rule, hearsay rule are applicable!
-Requisites for admissibility of documentary evidence (same as object evidence)
a. the document must be relevant
b. the evidence must be authenticated
c. The document must be authenticated by a competent witness
d. The document must be formally offered in evidence

Best evidence rule
-misnomer because the term has nothing to with the degree of its probative value; does not proclaim
itself as the highest and most reliable evidence; does not mean the most superior evidence;
-more accurately the original document rule; or the primary evidence rule
-rule requires the production of the original writing, not a secondary evidence
-A copy of the original writing is not as reliable as the original because of the possible inaccuracy in
the process of copying and erroneous transmission of the original.
-Purpose: The prevention of fraud or mistake in the proof of the contents of a writing.
-Requisites for rule to apply:
a. The subject matter must involve a document
-inapplicable to object evidence
b. The subject of the inquiry is the contents of the document
-Rule only applicable when the subject of the inquiry is the contents of a document.
The rule cannot be invoked unless the contents of a writing is the subject of judicial
inquiry, in which case the best evidence is the original writing itself.
-Inapplicable when the issue is the execution or existence of a document or the
circumstances surrounding its execution.
-The subject of inquiry is the CONTENTS of writing, not the truth thereof (this is the
issue in hearsay rule)

-Rule is waived if not raised in the trial. Other party must object otherwise, secondary evidence will
be deemed sufficient proof of facts therein.
NB: Even if secondary evidence is admitted because of waiver, its probative value must still
meet tests for such to be reliable

When secondary evidence can be presented, and presentation of original document is excused (S3,

(a) When the original has been lost or destroyed, or cannot be produced in court, without bad
faith on the part of the offeror;

-NOT limited to loss or destruction, but also covers other reason for failure to produce such as when
original is beyond the territorial jd of court; or original consists of inscriptions on immovable objects
i.e tombstones which cannot be produced in court

-Requisites: (LAY THE BASIS for production so that secondary evidence may be admitted)
i. The offeror must prove the execution and existence of the original document
-The due execution and authenticity of documents must be proved either by
a) anyone who saw document executed or written; of b) by evidence of the
genuineness of the signature or handwriting of the maker
ii. The offeror must show the cause of its unavailability
-burden of proof to show loss or destruction of original is on the proponent
of secondary evidence. Loss need not be shown beyond all possibility of
mistake Enough that he shows that there was bona fide and diligent but
fruitless search
iii. The offeror must show that the unavailability was not due to his bad faith

-When requirements for the laying the basis for introduction of secondary evidence are complied
with, secondary evidence may be admitted in the following order (hierarchy of preferred secondary
evidence must be strictly followed):
i. copy of the original
ii. recital of the contents of the document in some authentic document; or
iii. by the testimony of witnesses (S5, R130)

(b) When the original is in the custody or under the control of the party against whom the
evidence is offered, and the latter fails to produce it after reasonable notice;

Laying the basis requires proof of the following:
i. The original exists
ii. The said document is under the custody or control of the adverse party
iii. That the proponent of secondary evidence has given the adverse party reasonable notice
to produce the original documents
-offeror must prove that he has one all in his power to secure best evidence by giving
notice. Notice may be:
-motion for production of original;
-made in open court in the presence of adverse party
-subpoena duces tecum
-custodian must be given sufficient time to produce the same; only when such party does not
voluntarily offer it or refuses to produce it that secondary evidence may be admitted
iv. That the adverse party failed to produce the original document despite the reasonable

(c) When the original consists of numerous accounts or other documents which cannot be
examined in court without great loss of time and the fact sought to be established from them
is only the general result of the whole; and

i. if the original consists of numerous accounts or other documents;
ii. they cannot be examined in court without great loss of time; and
iii. the fact sough to be established from them is only the general result of the whole

-summary of number of documents; charts; calculations
-the voluminous records must be made accessible to the adverse party so that the correctness of
the summary may be tested by cross-examination

(d) When the original is a public record in the custody of a public officer or is recorded in a
public office.
-Ratio: public records are generally not b removed form the places where they are recorded and kept
(S26, R132)
-certified true copy of original issued by public official in custody may be presented

Meaning of original (S4, R130)
-when carbon sheets inserted between two sheets of paper, both sheets are deemed originals

Parol evidence (S9, R130)
-with reference to contract, means extraneous evidence or evidence aliunde
-has direct application to contracts which have been set forth in writing
-When the terms of an agreement have been reduced to writing, it is considered as containing all the
terms agreed upon and there can be, between the parties and their successors in interest, no
evidence of such terms other than the contents of the written agreement.
-The parol evidence rule becomes operative when the issues in the litigations are terms of a
WRITTEN agreement
-Inapplicable to ORAL agreements.
-not all writings will trigger application of this rule. The writing must embody an agreement
(note: agreement includes wills by express provision of law)
-Art 1443, CC: Express trust concerning an immovable or any interest hterein may not be
roved by parol evidence
-writing need not be in particular form. Can be private or public writing
-applies ONLY to PARTIES and their successors-in-interest
-does not bind suits involving strangers to the contract; strangers is allowed to introduce
extrinsic or parol evidence against eh efficacy of writing
-designed to give certainty to written transaction, preserve the reliability and protect the sanctity of
written agreement
-bars the offering of extrinsic evidence on prior, contemporaneous and subsequent agreements
-Parole evidence rule waivable. Waived when there is failure to object to the introduction of the
evidence aliunde. While the evidence aliunde may be admissible, that does not mean that court would
give probative value to such.

When and how to produce parol evidence
-to introduce parol evidence means to offer extrinsic evidence to modify, explain or add to the terms
of the written agreement.
-allowed when the following concur:
a. Put in issue in the pleadings
-pleader must allege in answer;
-party puts in issue in the pleadings the failure of written agreement to express the true intent of
the parties thereto that said party may present evidence to modify, explain or add to the terms of
the written agreement
- failure to pleads bars the offering of parol evidence

b. Involves the ff. matters (S9, R13)
a) An intrinsic ambiguity, mistake or imperfection in the written agreement;
-intrinsic or latent ambiguity only;
-if paten or extrinsic ambiguity, parol evidence will not be admitted even if put in issue

(b) The failure of the written agreement to express the true intent and agreement of the
parties thereto;
-Despite the meeting of the minds, the true agreement of the parties is not reflect in the
instrument (reformation)
-if no meeting of minds at all due to mistake, fraud, inequitable conduct or accident,
proper remedy is annulment since it is a voidable contract
-Reformation not allowed in the ff instances:
simple donations inter vivos when no condition imposed
wills; or
when real agreement is void
-While parol evidence may be admissible to explain meaning of contract, cannot be used to
incorporate additional conditions not mentioned at all in the writing, unless there is fraud or

(c) The validity of the written agreement; or

(d) The existence of other terms agreed to by the parties or their successors in interest
after the execution of the written agreement.

Best Evidence Rule Parol Evidence Rule
Apply only to documentary evidence; inapplicable to object evidence
Establishes a preference over a secondary Not concerned with primacy of evidence. This
evidence rule presupposes that the original is available
Precludes the admission of secondary evidence Precludes the admission of other evidence to
when original document is available prove terms of a document other than the
contents of the document itself for the purpose of
varying the terms of the writing
Can be invoked by any litigant to an action won Can be invoked only by parties to the document
litigant is a party to the document involved and their successors-in-interest
Applies to all forms of writing Applies to written agreements (contracts) and

-A competent witness is one who is qualified to take the stand and testify
-GR: A person who takes the stand as a witness is PRESUMED to be qualified to testify. If one
questions the competence of the witness, he must object as soon as the facts tend to show his
incompetence are apparent

Competent witness v credible witness
-Competence is a matter of law
a. Matters that do NOT affect the competency of witnesses
i. religious belief
ii. political belief
iii. inters tint he outcome of the case
iv. conviction of crime, unless otherwise provided by law i.e. those convicted of
falsification of document, perjury, false testimony dq from being witnesses
to a will; dq from testifying during probate of a will
v. Bias
vi. Relationship
vii. Drug abuse
1. For v, vi, vii, while not affecting competency, may affect credibility
b. Matters that affect the competency of witnesses
i. Mental incapacity (S21(a), R130)
ii. Immaturity (S21(b), R 130)
iii. Dead mans statute or survivorship disqualification (S23, R130)
iv. Marital disqualification (spousal immunity) (S22, R130)
v. Marital privileged communications (s24a, R130)
vi. Atty-Client privilege (S 24b, R130)
vii. Physician-patient privilege (S24, R130)
viii. Priest/minister-penitent privilege (S24d, R130)
ix. Privileged communications to public officers (24e, R130)
x. Parental and filial privilege (s25, R130)

-Credibility of witness refers to the weight, trustworthiness or reliability of the testimony
-Determining credibility is a matter of judicial discretion. Such an assessment is best made
by a trial court as the trial court judge is in the best position to assess the credibility of the
witness as it has the unique and unmatched opportunity to observe the demeanor of the
witness and assess his credibility
-Youth and immaturity are generally badges of truth and sincerity

-Basic qualifications of a witness:
1. Can perceive
-A witness can testify only to those facts which he knows of his personal knowledge i.e. those
which are derived from hos own perception. (S36, R130). Without personal knowledge, not
competent to testify

-Deaf mutes are not necessarily incompetent witnesses. They are competent if:
i. can understand and appreciate the sanctity of oath
i.. can comprehend facts they are going to testify to
ii. can communicate their ideas thru a qualified interpreter

2. In perceiving, can make known his perception to other
a. Ability to remember what has been perceived
b. Ability to communicate the remembered perception
3. He must take either an oath or affirmation (S1, R132)
4. He must not possess any of the disqualifications imposed by the law or the rules

Mental incapacity (S21(a), R130)
a. The person must be incapable of intelligently making known his perception to others;
b. His incapability must exist at the time of his PRODUCTION for examination
-incapacity at the time of PERCEPTION does not affect competency, but may affect
his credibility

Immaturity (S21(b), R 130)
a. The mental maturity of the witness must ender him incapable of perceiving facts respecting
which he is examined
b. He is incapable of relation his perception truthfully

NOTE: incompetence exists at the time of perception, and at the time he relates such perception

Child Witnesses (see Rule on Examination of Child Witness)
GR: A child is presumed qualified to be a witness
To rebut the presumption, the party challenging has burden of proof
-When there is doubt as to competency of child, court can conduct COMPETENCY EXAMINATION of
child, motu propio or by motion of party
-CE only done by judge. If party wishes to ask questions, he cannot do so directly. Submit
questions to judge
-questions asked not related at issues at trial but on ability of child to remembers and
distinguish truth from falsehood
-continuing assessment
-trial court can order that testimony of child be taken by live-ink television when there is
substantial likelihood that the child would suffer trauma from testifying int her present of
the accused, his counsel or the prosecution. Trauma must be of a kind that impairs the
completeness and truthfulness of the testimony
-limited people who are allowed to be present during CE (see list)

Dead mans statute or survivorship disqualification (S23, R130)
a. The DEFENDANT in the case is the executor or administrator or administrator or a
representative of the deceased or the person of unsound mind
-So it is the exec/admin who can invoke the protection
-NB: If it is the executor who is the plaintiff, or the one is filing a claim against the
other party, the other party can testify as to his transaction with the deceased
-When a counterclaim is set up by the admin/exec, the case is removed from
operation of this rule. So plaintiff may testify to the occurrences before the death of
deceased to defeat the counterclaim
b. The suit is upon a claim by the plaintiff against the estate of said deceased or person of
unsound mind;
-Nature of the case must be civil, not criminal because the estate itself cannot e
criminally liable
c. The witness is the PLAINTIFF; or an assignor of that party, or a person in whose behalf the
case is prosecuted
-individuals enumerate EXCLUSIVE
-Witnesses who merely witnessed the transaction and who have no interest in the
transaction(disinterested witnesses) are not prohibited to testify.
d. The subject of the testimony is as to any matter of fact occurring before the death of such
deceased person or before such person became of unsound mind
-can testify on matter that happened AFTER
-a testimony beneficial to the estate is permitted
i.e. testifying that the estate owed a lesser amount

Purpose of the Dead Mans statute TO guard against the temptation to give false testimony in
regard to the transaction on the part of the surviving party and thereby put the parties in equal
terms. Its purpose is to close the lips of the plaintiff when death has closed the lips of the defendant
in order to remove from the plaintiff the temptation to do falsehood and the possibility of fictitious
claims against the deceased.

This is waivable. Waived when:
i. there is failure to object to the testimony
ii. cross-examining the witness on the prohibited testimony
iii. offering evidence to rebut the testimony

Marital disqualification (spousal immunity) (S22, R130)
Reasons for this rule:
a. There is identity of interest between husband and wife
b. If one were to testify for or against the other, there is a danger of perjury
c. Policy of law to guard the confidences of private life and prevent domestic disunion
d. When there is want of domestic tranquility, there is danger of publishing one spouse thru a
hostile testimony

-extends to testimony that are either favorable or adverse against the spouse;
-testimony covered by disqualification extends not only to utterances but also to production of
-the witness spouse need not be party to the case; but the other spouse must be a party to the case
-extends to criminal and civil cases
-at the time the testimony is offered, there must be a valid marriage; inapplicable to common-law
-what is prohibited is the giving of testimony DURING the marriage
-When marriage has already been annulled, no more disqualification
-NB Ramirez v. Alvarez case where court ruled that even though husband and wife were
merely legally separated, the disqualification cannot be invoked since they were estranged
spouses (the husband burned the house of the wifes sisters house while he knew that she
was in the said house; sister-in-law filed complaint for arson; wife is testifying) The court
said that the purpose of the dq is no longer there. SC said that where the marital and
domestic relations are so strained there is no more harmony to be preserved nor peace and
tranquility which may be disturbed, the reason based upon such harmony and tranquility
fails. The security and confidences of private life which the law aims ar protecting, will be
nothing but ideals.

-It does NOT matter that the facts subject of the testimony occurred or came to the knowledge of
witness were acquired before marriage. Still disqualified for as long as the witness spouse testifies
during the marriage
-where the spouse is accused with others, the spouse-witness can testify against the spouses co-
accused, but such testimony cannot be used against the accuseds spouse directly or thru the guide of
taking judicial notice of the proceedings. What cannot be done directly cannot be done indirectly.

Exceptions to the marital dq rule::
a. civil case by one against the other
b. criminal case for a crime committed by one against the other, or the latters direct
descendants or ascendants

Marital privileged communications (S24a, R130)
a. there must be a valid marriage between the husband and wife
b. there is a communication received in confidence by one from the other
-information received from a third person is not covered by privilege
-to be confidential, there must have been an intention that such communication not
be shared with others. Without the intention, it is not confidential.
-GR: Communication in private between husband and wife are PRESUMED to be
confidential. Preemption is rebutted when:
a. if a third person, other than child was present with knowledge of
sps when communicated uttered
b. if children or family are present, unless children are too young to
c. the confidential communication was received during the marriage
-confidential information received before the marriage not covered

-The privilege may only be raised by the spouse, not a third person.

Marital dq rule (S22, R130) Marital privileged communication (S24a, R130)
Does not refer to confidential communication Refers to confidential communication
between the sps -apply this when confidential comm involved. If
-if involved is confidential comm, apply s24 not, apply S22, R130
Includes facts, occurrences and information even Refers only to information obtained DURING the
PRIOR to marriage (this is broader) marriage
-May only be asserted during a valid marriage May object even AFTER the dissolution of
marriage. Privilege does not cease just because
marriage has ended for as long as information
was received during marriage

Atty-Client privilege (S24b, R130)
a. There must be a communication made by client to the atty, or an advice given by the atty to
his client;
-if atty turned out to be a detective, still covered if client reasonably believed that
the person consulted was lawyer
-not covered if person conslults an atty as a friend or business partner; as
b. The communication or advice must be given in confidence; and
-confidential even if transmitted thru facsimile/ electronic means
-must have intended to be confidential; if told in the presence of third persons who
do not hold positions of confidence to either the client or atty, not confidential
c. The communication or advice must be given either in the course of the professional
employment or with a view to professional employment
-with a view to not required that there be a perfected atty-client relationship.;
includes preliminary negotiations with atty; covered even though lawyer declines to
handle the case;
-payment of fee is not essential

-privilege not limited to actual pending cases. Anticipated litigations are covered
-If in anticipation of a crime, planning stage of crime not covered. But once the crime has already
been committed and client tells lawyer, privilege attaches
-GR: The fact of consultation is not privileged. The identity of client and lawyer not privileged
Except: last link doctrine when non-privileged information such as the identity of client
is protected if such revelation would necessarily reveal the privileged information

-communication need not be given to atty directly. Privilege still there even if transmitted to attys
secretary, clerk or stenographer if they acquired such information in such capacity.

-eavesdropper covered by privilege (Riano); US jurisprudence says that eavesdropper not covered.

-privilege does NOT apply in suits between atty and the client i.e. suit for atty. fees or damages
against the negligence of the atty. Atty can testify.

-the privilege is owned by CLIENT. Only he can invoke the privilege. No one else. Not even the atty
can invoke the privilege

-GR: Privilege survives the death of client
Exception: Attack on the validity of the will of client, communications made to atty on the
drawing of will, while confidential during lifetime of client, are not intended to require
secrecy after his death

Physician-patient privilege (S24, R130)
-only applies to civil cases; privilege cannot be claimed in criminal cases because interest f public in
criminal cases is more important than secrecy of communication
-NOT required that there be a contractual relationship. Quasi-contractual relationship is sufficient i.e
as in the case where patient is seriously ill and doctor treats him when he is not in a condition to give
-covers preventive and curative treatment
-Riano: does NOT cover autopsies since autopsies are NOT treatments
-does Not apply to shield commission of crime i.e. plastic surgery to hide identity; or when there is
unlawful purpose such as obtaining prohibited drugs since no treatment involved;
-privilege survives the death of patient
-waivable by PATIENT only
a. express waiver- life insurance
b. by operation of law (S1, R28)- where a party who is asked to submit to physical or mental
examination and party examined requests for report. In doing so, he waives privilege he
may have in that action regarding testimony of person who has examine him

Priest/minister-penitent privilege (S24d, R130)
-it is the penitent who owns the privilege
-extends to advice and confession
-minister/priest must be ordained or consecrated
-communication must be made pursuant to confession of sins
-not covered if penitent discusses business arrangement with priests

Privileged communications to public officers (24e, R130)
-interest of public is being protected by rule
-disclosure or non-disclosure is not dependent on the will of officer; but on the will of the COURT
-can be invoked DURING and AFTER the term of the officer

Executive privilege; Presidential communication privilege
-Privileged information refers to specific categories of INFORMATION; and not to categories of
individuals. The following are deemed to be privileged categories of information:
i. military
ii. diplomatic; and
iii. other national security matters

Legislative vis--vis executive privilege
a. Question Hour department heads of the executive department is discretionary; valid
requirement to secure presidents consent before appearing before Congress
b. IN aid of legislation
GR: Congress not bound to respect the refusal of department heads. But Congress is
ABSOLUTELY bound to respect the refusal of the PRESIDENT alone
Exception to rule (with respect to department heads only)Executive branch thru
President or Executive Secretary must formally assert executive privilege; and state
reasons for the claim. There must be specific basis for claim.
-not enough to merely say the president did not give her consent

Parental and filial privilege (s25, R130)