PNOC Shipping, v.

CA Facts: M/V Maria Efigenia XV, owned by Maria Efigenia Fishing Corporation (MEFC), collided with the vessel Petroparcel, owned by the !"on #tevedoring Corporation ( #C)$ %he incident was investigated by the &oard of Marine 'n(!iry and Petroparcel was fo!nd at fa!lt$ MEFC s!ed #C, later s!bstit!ted by P)*C #hipping and %ransport Corp$, and the Petroparcel captain, Edgardo +or!elo for da,ages representing val!e of fishing nets, boat e(!ip,ent and cargoes, interest and attorney-s fees$ MFEC presented in evidence its general ,anager and sole witness Edilberto +el .osario who testified that M/V Maria Efigenia XV was owned by respondent$ /t the ti,e of sin0ing, the vessel was carrying 1,232 t!bs of fish the val!e of which was never recovered$ /lso lost were two C!,,ins engines, radar, patho,eter and co,pass$ +oc!,entary evidence presented consisted of the following4 Marine Protest e5ec!ted by +elfin Villarosa 6r, (!otation for the constr!ction of 789footer trawler iss!ed by 'sidro Magalong of / Magalong Engineering and Constr!ction showing cost of trawler, pro for,a invoice showing cost of engine, (!otation of prices iss!ed by #can Marine 'nc showing cost or radar, a (!otation by #aefgear #ales 'nc, regarding cost of other e(!ip,ents, and retainer agree,ent between +el .osario and F$ #!,!long /ssociates aw *ffices$ ower co!rt held that theprevailing replace,ent val!e of P3,:;<,2:<$22 of the fishing boat and all its e(!ip,ent wo!ld reg!larly increase at ;2= every year fro, date (!otations were given$ P)*C, ,eanwhile, ,erely presented oren"o a"aro, senior esti,ator of the P)*C +oc0yard > Engineering Corporation as sole witness and no other doc!,entary evidence to s!pport its position$ a"aro testified that price (!otations s!b,itted were e5cessive and that as an e5pert witness, he !sed the (!otations of his s!ppliers in ,a0ing his esti,ates$ &!t he failed to present s!ch saying that he co!ld not prod!ce a brea0down of the cost of his esti,ates as it was ?a sort of secret sche,e$@

Issue: Can the (!otations presented by the prosec!tion be ad,itted in evidence as a co,,ercial list e5ception to the hearsay r!leA Held: )o$ Price (!otations are ordinary private writings which !nder the .evised .!les of Co!rt sho!ld have been proffered along with the testi,ony of the a!thors thereof$ +el .osario co!ld not have testified on the veracity of the contents of the writings beca!se he was not the one who iss!ed the price (!otations$ #ection ;3 .!le 1;2 of the .evised .!les of Co!rt provides that a witness can testify only to those facts that he 0nows of his personal 0nowledge$ %h!s, +el .osario-s clai, that losses inc!rred were in the a,o!nt of P3,:;<,2:<$22 sho!ld have been ad,itted with e5tre,e ca!tion beca!se it was ,erely a bare assertion and sho!ld have been s!pported

by independent evidence$ &eing also the owner of the MFEC, whatever testi,ony he wo!ld give with regard to the val!e of the lost vessel, its e(!ip,ent and cargoes sho!ld be viewed in the light of his self9 interest$ Bis testi,ony with regard e(!ip,ent installed and cargoes loaded sho!ld be given credence$ Bowever, his testi,ony with regard val!ation of e(!ip,ent ,!st not be accepted as the tr!th$ Price (!otations presented as evidence parta0e of the nat!re of the hearsay evidence considering that the persons who iss!ed the, were not presented as witnesses$ /ny evidence, whether oral or doc!,entary is hearsay if its probative val!e is not based on the personal 0nowledge of the witness b!t on the 0nowledge of another person who is not on the witness stand$ Hearsay evidence, whether objected to or not, has no probative value unless the proponent can show that the evidence falls within the exceptions to the hearsay evidence rule. %he e5hibits presented do not fall !nder any of the e5ceptions provided !nder #ections ;C to :C of .!le 1;2$ Dnder #ection :8, a doc!,ent is a co,,ercial list if4 1) 't is a state,ent of ,atters of interest to persons engaged in an occ!pationE F) #!ch state,ent is contained in a list, register, periodical or other p!blished co,pilationE ;) #aid co,pilation is p!blished for the !se of persons engaged in that occ!pationE and :) 't is generally !sed and relied !pon by persons in the sa,e occ!pation$ %he doc!,entary evidence presented is not ?co,,ercial lists@ for these do not belong to the category of other p!blished co,pilations !nder #ection :8$ The exhibits are mere price quotations issued personally to el !osario who requested for them. %hese are not p!blished in any list, register, periodical or other co,pilation on the relevant s!bGect ,atter$ )either are these ?,ar0et reports or (!otations@ within the p!rview of ?co,,ercial lists@ as these are not ?standard handboo0s or periodicals, containing data of everyday professional need and relied !pon in the wor0 of the occ!pation$@ %hese are si,ple letters responding to the (!eries of +el .osario$ etters and telegra,s are ad,issible in evidence b!t these are however s!bGect to the general principles of evidence and to vario!s r!les relating to doc!,entary evidence$
octrine: / doc!,ent is a co,,ercial list if4 1) 't is a state,ent of ,atters of interest to persons engaged in anv occ!pationE F) #!ch state,ent is contained in a list, register, periodical or other p!blished co,pilationE ;) #aid co,pilation is p!blished for the !se of persons engaged in that occ!pationE and :) 't is generally !sed and relied !pon by persons in the sa,e occ!pation$