TABLE OF CONTENTS
E. View of an Object or Scene .............. 9
EVIDENCE
I. GENERAL PRINCIPLES .................................... 1
A. Concept of Evidence....................... 1
B. Scope of the Rules of Evidence .......... 1
C. Evidence In Civil Cases versus Evidence
In Criminal Cases .............................. 1
D. Proof versus Evidence ..................... 1
E. Factum Probans And Factum Probandum
................................................... 1
F. Admissibility of Evidence ................. 1
f.1. Requisites For Admissibility of Evidence 1
F.2. Relevance of Evidence and Collateral
Matters............................................ 2
F.3. Multiple admissibility...................... 2
F.4. Conditional admissibility .................. 2
F.5. Curative admissibility ..................... 2
F.6. Direct and Circumstantial Evidence ..... 2
F.7. Positive and Negative Evidence .......... 2
F.8. Competence and Credible Evidence..... 2
G. Burden of Proof and Burden of Evidence
................................................... 2
H. Presumptions ............................... 3
H.1. Conclusive Presumption .................. 3
H.2. Disputable Presumption .................. 4
I. Liberal Construction of Rules of Evidence
................................................... 5
J. Quantum of Evidence ...................... 5
PROOF BEYOND REASONABLE DOUBT .......................5
PREPONDERANCE OF EVIDENCE .................................5
SUBSTANTIAL EVIDENCE .............................................5
CLEAR AND CONVINCING EVIDENCE...........................5
II. Judicial Notice and Judicial Admissions ............ 6
A. What Need Not Be Proved ................ 6
B. Matters of Judicial Notice ................ 6
B.1. Mandatory .................................. 6
B.2. Discretionary ............................... 7
C. JUDICIAL ADMISSIONS ...................... 7
C.1. Effect of Judicial Admissions............. 7
C.2. How Judicial Admissions may be
Contradicted ..................................... 7
D. Judicial Notice of Foreign Laws, Law of
Nations and Municipal Ordinance ........... 7
Foreign Laws ..................................... 7
Law of Nations ................................... 8
Municipal Ordinances .................................................8
III. Object (Real) Evidence..................................... 9
A. Nature of Object Evidence ............... 9
B. Requisites for Admissibility............... 9
C. Categories of Object Evidence .......... 9
D. Demonstrative Evidence .................. 9
LA SALLIAN COMMISION ON BAR OPERATIONS
i REMEDIAL LAW
IV. Documentary Evidence .................................. 10
A. Meaning of Documentary Evidence ....10
B. Requisites for Admissibility .............10
C. Best Evidence Rule .......................10
C.1. Meaning of the Rule ...................... 10
C.2. When Applicable.......................... 10
C.3. Meaning of Original ....................10
Rules on Telegrams and Cables ................................ 11
C.4. Requisites for Introduction of Secondary
Evidence ......................................... 11
D. Parol Evidence Rule ......................11
Requisites for Applicability ....................................... 12
Applicability .............................................................. 12
Parol Evidence Rule v. Best Evidence Rule . 12
E. Authentication and Proof of Documents
..................................................13
E.1 Meaning of Authentication ............... 13
E.2. Public and Private Documents .......... 13
E.3. When a Private Writing Requires
Authentication; Proof of Private Writing ... 14
E.4. When Evidence of Authenticity of a
Private Writing is not Required .............. 14
E.5. How to Prove Genuineness of a
Handwriting ..................................... 14
E.6. Public Documents as Evidence; Proof of
Official Records ................................ 14
E.7. Attestation of a Copy.................... 15
E.8. Public Record of a Private Document .. 15
E.9. Proof of Lack of Record .................. 15
E.10. How Judicial Record is Impeached .... 15
E.11. Proof of Notarial Documents .......... 15
E.12. How to Explain Alterations in a
Document ....................................... 15
E.13. Documentary Evidence in an Unofficial
Language ........................................ 16
V. Testimonial Evidence ...................................... 16
A. Qualifications of a Witness ..............16
B. Competency versus Credibility of a
Witness .........................................16
C. Disqualifications of a Witness ...........17
C.1. Disqualification by Reason of Mental
Capacity or Immaturity ........................ 17
Competency of a child witness (Sec 6) ..................... 17
C.2. Disqualification by Reason of Marriage 17
Rule on Marital Disqualification (Spousal Immunity):
.................................................................................. 17
C.3. Disqualification by Reason of Death or
Insanity of Adverse Party...................... 18
C.4. Disqualification by Reason of Privileged
Communication ................................. 18
C.4.1. Husband and Wife (Marital Privilege) ............ 19
C.4.2. Attorney – Client Privilege .............................. 19
 TABLE OF CONTENTS ii REMEDIAL LAW

C.4.3. Physician – Patient Privilege ...........................20 F.3.7. Entries in the Course of Business .................... 34
C.4.4. Priest – Penitent Privilege ...............................20 F.3.8. Entries in Official Records ............................... 34
C.4.5. Privileged Communication to Public Officers ..20 F.3.9. Commercial Lists ............................................. 35
C.4.6. Parental and Filial Privilege Rule ....................21 F.3.10. Learned Treaties ........................................... 35
D. Examination of a Witness ............... 21 F.3.11. Testimony or Deposition at a former Trial ... 36
Rules For Admissibility ..............................................21 G. Opinion Rule ...............................36
How Oral Evidence is Given .......................................21 G.1. Opinion of Expert Witness .............. 37
D.1. Judicial Affidavit Rule .................. 22 Probative Value of Expert Evidence.......................... 37
D.1.1. Scope and Where Applicable ..........................22 G.2. Opinion of Ordinary Witness ............ 37
D.1.2. Contents and Procedure .................................22 H. Character Evidence.......................38
D.1.3. Application to Criminal Actions ......................23 H.1. Character Evidence in Criminal Cases . 38
D.1.4. Effect of Non-Compliance ...............................23 H.2. Character Evidence in Civil Cases ...... 39
D.1.5. Effect on Other Rules ......................................23
D.2. Rights and Obligations of a Witness ... 23 VI. Offer & Objection............................................ 39
Obligations of a Witness ...........................................24 A. Offer of Evidence .........................39
Rights of a Witness....................................................24 B. When to Make an Offer ..................39
D.3. Order in the Examination of Witnesses 24 Procedure Before Documentary and Object
D.3.1. Direct Examination .........................................24
Evidence Can be Considered by the Court .. 40
D.3.2. Cross Examination ..........................................24
Marking .................................................................... 40
D.3.3. Re-Direct Examination ....................................25
Identification ............................................................ 40
D.3.4. Re-Cross Examination .....................................25
Authentication .......................................................... 40
D.3.5. Recalling Wiitness ...........................................25
Formal Offer ............................................................. 40
D.4. Leading and Misleading Questions ..... 25 Objections ................................................................. 40
D.5. Methods of Impeaching of Adverse
C. Objection...................................40
Party’s Witness ................................ 26
Classifications of Objections.................. 40
D.6. How the Witness is Impeached by
Effect of General Objection .................. 40
Evidence of Inconsistent Statements (Laying
When to make Objection ...................... 40
the Predicate) ................................. 26
D.7. Evidence of Good Character of a Witness
D. Repetition of an Objection ..............41
................................................... 26 E. Ruling .......................................41
Evidence of good character of witness .....................26 F. Striking Out of an Answer................42
Impeachment of witness by evidence of wrongful acts G. Tender of Excluded Evidence ...........42
...................................................................................27
E. Admissions and Confessions ............ 27
E.1. Res Inter Alios Acta Rule ................ 27
E.2. Admission by a Party .................... 27
Other Forms of Admissions: ......................................27
E.3. Admission by a Third Party ............. 27
E.4. Admission by a Co-Partner or Agent... 28
E.5. Admission by a Conspirator ............. 28
Admission by a conspirator .......................................28
E.6. Admission by Privies ..................... 28
E.7. Admission by Silence .................... 29
E.8. Confessions ............................... 29
E.9. Similar Acts as Evidence ................ 29
F. Hearsay Rule .............................. 30
F.1. Meaning of Hearsay ...................... 30
F.2. Reason for Exclusion of Hearsay
Evidence ........................................ 30
F.3. Exceptions to the Hearsay Rule ........ 30
F.3.1. Dying Declaration ............................................30
F.3.2. Declaration Against Interest ...........................30
F.3.3. Act or Declaration about Pedigree ..................31
F.3.4. Family Reputation or Tradition regarding
Pedigree ....................................................................32
F.3.5. Common Reputation .......................................32
F.3.6. Part of the Res Gestae .....................................33

LA SALLIAN COMMISION ON BAR OPERATIONS

 EVIDENCE 1 REMEDIAL LAW

I. GENERAL Civil Cases Criminal Cases

received in
PRINCIPLES evidence as an
implied admission
A. Concept of Evidence of guilt
B. Scope of the Rules on Evidence Accused enjoys
C. Evidence in Civil Cases versus Evidence in Not apply unless such presumption
Criminal Cases Presumption
specifically (Sec. 14, Art. III,
of Innocence
D. Proof versus Evidence provided by law Constitution of
E. Factum Probans versus Factum Probandum the Philippines)
F. Admissibility of Evidence
G. Burden of Proof and Burden of Evidence
H. Presumptions D. PROOF VERSUS EVIDENCE
I. Liberal Construction on the Rules of Evidence
J. Quantum of Evidence Proof Evidence
Merely the probative effect the means, sanctioned
A. CONCEPT OF EVIDENCE of evidence and is the by these rules, of
conviction or persuasion of ascertaining in a
RULE 128
the mind resulting from a judicial proceeding the
SEC. 1. Evidence defined.— Evidence is the means, consideration of the truth respecting a
sanctioned by these rules, of ascertaining in a evidence (29 Am Jur 2d, matter of fact (Sec.1,
judicial proceeding the truth respecting a matter of Evidence, S2) Rule 128, RoC)
fact.
the effect or result of
Medium of proof
evidence

B. SCOPE OF THE RULES OF EVIDENCE

RULE 128 E. FACTUM PROBANS AND FACTUM
SEC. 2. Scope.—The rules of evidence shall be the PROBANDUM
same in all courts and in all trials and hearings,
except as otherwise provided by law or these rules. Factum Probans Factum Probandum
The evidentiary fact or Ultimate fact or the fact
GENERAL RULE: The Principle of Uniformity the fact by which the sought to be established
The Rules of evidence shall be the same in all courts factum probandum is to
and in all trials and hearings be established.
Refers to the materials Refers to the proposition
EXCEPTIONS: Administrative or Quasi-Judicial which established the ; Elements of the cause
Proceedings proposition of action

In administrative proceedings, such as those before
the BOC, technical rules of procedure and evidence
are not strictly applied and administrative due
process cannot be fully equated with due process in
its strict judicial sense. (El Greco Ship Maning and
Management Corporation v. Commissioner of
Customs, G.R. No. 177188, December 4, 2008)
Ex. If P claims to have been injured by the negligence
of D who denies having been negligent.
Factum probandum: The negligence of D and
the causal connection between such negligence,
and the injuries of P taken as a whole
Factum probans: The totality of the evidence
to prove the liability

C. EVIDENCE IN CIVIL CASES VERSUS EVIDENCE F. ADMISSIBILITY OF EVIDENCE

IN CRIMINAL CASES RULE 128
Civil Cases Criminal Cases SEC. 3. Admissibility of Evidence.—Evidence is
Preponderance Beyond admissible when it is relevant to the issue and is not
Quantum of excluded by the law or these rules.
of Evidence Reasonable Doubt
Proof
(Sec.1, Rule 133) (Sec.2, Rule 133)
Not an admission Except those F.1. REQUISITES FOR ADMISSIBILITY OF
Offer of of liability, and involving quasi EVIDENCE
Compromise is not admissible offenses or those (1) Evidence is relevant; and
(Sec. 27, in evidence allowed by law to (2) Evidence is competent or not excluded by the
Rule 130) against the be compromised, rules
offeror such may be

LA SALLIAN COMMISION ON BAR OPERATIONS

 EVIDENCE 2 REMEDIAL LAW

RELEVANT, MATERIAL, AND COMPETENT TYPES OF ADMISSIBILITY

EVIDENCE F.3. MULTIPLE ADMISSIBILITY
Relevant - evidence having any value in reason as
admissible for 2 or more purposes.
tending to prove any matter provable in an action.

TEST: The logical relation of the evidentiary fact to F.4. CONDITIONAL ADMISSIBILITY
the fact in issue, whether the former tends to admissibility of evidence, which may have relation to
establish the probability or improbability of the some other facts not yet presented, subject to the
latter. condition that relevancy would later on be shown.

Material- evidence directed to prove a fact in issue as F.5. CURATIVE ADMISSIBILITY

determined by the rules of substantive law and
pleadings. admissibility of inadmissible evidence to answer the
opposing party’s previous introduction of inadmissible
TEST: evidence if it would remove any unfair prejudice
(1) W/N the fact it intends to prove is an issue or caused by the admission of the earlier inadmissible
not. evidence.
(2) W/N a fact is in issue: Determined by substantive
law, pleadings, pre-trial order and by admissions F.6. DIRECT AND CIRCUMSTANTIAL EVIDENCE
or confessions on file. Direct Evidence Circumstantial Evidence
(3) Evidence may be relevant BUT may be
Proves a fact Evidence which indirectly proves a
immaterial.
without a need fact in issue through an inference
to make an which the fact finder draws from
Competent- one that is not excluded by the Rules,
inference from the evidence established (People
statutes or the Constitution. (Sec 3, Rule 128)
another fact v. Matito, GR No. 144405,
February 24, 2004)
F.2. RELEVANCE OF EVIDENCE AND COLLATERAL
MATTERS F.7. POSITIVE AND NEGATIVE EVIDENCE
RULE 128
Positive Evidence Negative Evidence
SEC. 4. Relevancy; collateral matters.—Evidence
When witness affirms in When the witness states
must have such a relation to the fact in issue as to
the stand that a certain that an event did not
induce belief in its existence or non-existence.
state of facts does exist occur or that the state of
Evidence on collateral matters shall not be allowed,
or that a certain event facts alleged to exist does
except when it tends in any reasonable degree to
happened not actually exist
establish the probability or improbability of the fact
in issue. Presence of something Absence of something

RELEVANCE Positive evidence is, as a general rule, more credible

Relevance is a matter of relationship between the than negative evidence. The reason for this rule is
evidence and the fact in issue. (Riano, Evidence (The that the witness who testifies to a negative may have
Bar Lecture Series), p. 21, 2013 ed.) forgotten what actually occurred, while it is
impossible to remember what never existed. (Gomez
“There is no precise and universal test of relevancy v. Gomez- Samson, GR No. 156284, February 6, 2007)
provided by law. However, the determination of
whether particular evidence is relevant rests largely F.8. COMPETENCE AND CREDIBLE EVIDENCE
at the discretion of the court, which must be
Competence Credibility
exercised according to the teachings of logic and
everyday experience” (People v. Galleno, GR No. Not excluded by the Rules, Worthiness of
123546, July 2, 1998) statutes or the Constitution belief

COLLATERAL MATTERS G. BURDEN OF PROOF AND BURDEN OF

A matter is collateral when it is on a “parallel or
diverging line,” merely “additional” or “auxiliary”
(Black’s Law Dictionary, 5th Ed., p. 237)
General Rule: Collateral Matters are not allowed
Exception: When it tends in any reasonable degree to
establish the probability or improbability of the fact
in issue. (Sec. 4, Rule 128)
EVIDENCE
RULE 131
SECTION 1. Burden of proof.—Burden of proof is the
duty 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.(1a, 2a)
Burden of Proof or “onus probandi”, defined:
Obligation imposed upon a party who alleges the

LA SALLIAN COMMISION ON BAR OPERATIONS

 EVIDENCE 3 REMEDIAL LAW

existence of facts necessary for the prosecution of his Burden of Proof Burden of Evidence
action or defense to establish the same by the Generally determined by the
requisite quantum of evidence. developments of the trial, or by
the provisions of substantive
Proof - The establishment of a requisite degree of Generally
law or procedural rules which
belief in the mind of the trier of fact as to the fact in determined by the
may relieve the party from
issue. pleadings filed by
presenting evidence on the
the party.
facts alleged. (ex.
Upon Whom Burden of Proof Rests: Presumptions, judicial notice)
Civil Cases Criminal Cases
On the party who would be The burden of H. PRESUMPTIONS
defeated if no evidence were proof is always with
given on either side. the prosecution Presumption - An inference as to the existence or
Has the burden of Note: It is required non-existence of a fact which courts are permitted to
proof to show the that courts draw from the proof of other facts.
truth of his determine first if
allegations if the the evidence of the Note: A presumption shifts the burden of going
Plaintiff forward with the evidence. It imposes on the party
defendant raises a prosecution has at
negative defense. least shown a against whom it is directed the burden of going
(w/ respect to his prima facie case forward with evidence to meet or rebut the
complaint) before considering presumption.
Has the burden of the evidence of the
proof if he raises defense. H.1. CONCLUSIVE PRESUMPTION
an affirmative *If established – SEC. 2. Conclusive presumptions, Rule 131
defense on the then the burden is The following are instances of conclusive
Defendant
complaint of the shifted upon the presumptions:
plaintiff. accused to prove (a) Whenever a party has, by his own declaration,
(w/ respect to his otherwise act, or omission, intentionally and deliberately
counterclaim) led another to believe a particular thing true,
Cross w/ respect to his and to act upon such belief, he cannot, in any
Claimant cross claim litigation arising out of such declaration, act or
omission, be permitted to falsify it:
Burden of Evidence - The logical necessity on a party (b) The tenant is not permitted to deny the title of
during a particular time of the trial to create a prima his landlord at the time of the commencement of
facie case in its favor or to destroy that created the relation of landlord and tenant between
against him by presenting evidence. them.(3a)

In BOTH civil and criminal cases: The burden of Conclusive Presumptions may either be:
evidence lies w/ the party who asserts an affirmative (1) Estoppel in Pais
allegation. (2) Estoppel by Deed

Civil Cases Criminal Cases Estoppel in Pais - Whenever a party has, by his own
Plaintiff Prosection declaration, act, or omission, intentionally and
Must prove the Must prove the its affirmative deliberately led another to believe a particular thing
affirmative allegations in the indictments true, and to act upon such belief, he cannot, in any
allegations in his (elements of the crime and the litigation arising out of such declaration, act or
complaint attending circumstances) omission, be permitted to falsify it (Sec. 2(a), Rule
Defendant Defense 131)
In his counterclaim
As to the justifying, exempting, Estoppel by Deed- The tenant is not permitted to
and in his
mitigating, and absolutory deny the title of his landlord at the time of the
affirmative
circumstances commencement of the relation of landlord and tenant
defenses
between them
Burden of Proof Burden of Evidence
Does not shift and The tenant is estopped from asserting a better title
remains throughout Shifts from party to party not only in himself but also in some third person
including the State. (Borre v. CA, GR No. L-57204,
the entire case depending upon the exigencies
exactly where the of the case in the course of the March 14, 1988)
original pleadings trial
placed it. This estoppel applies even though the lessor had no
title at the time the relation of [the] lessor and [the]

LA SALLIAN COMMISION ON BAR OPERATIONS

 EVIDENCE
lessee was created, and may be asserted not only by
the original lessor, but also by those who succeed to
his title." Once a contact of lease is shown to exist
between the parties, the lessee cannot by any proof,
however strong, overturn the conclusive presumption
that the lessor has a valid title to or a better right of
possession to the subject premises than the
lessee.(Samelo v. Manotok Services, Inc., GR No.
170509, June 27, 2012)
H.2. DISPUTABLE PRESUMPTION
SEC. 3. Disputable presumptions, Rule 131
The following presumptions are satisfactory if
uncontradicted, but may be contradicted and
overcome by other evidence:
(a) That a person is innocent of crime or wrong;
(b) That an unlawful act was done with an unlawful
intent;
(c) That a person intends the ordinary consequences
of his voluntary act;
(d) That a person take ordinary care of his concerns;
(e) That evidence willfully suppressed would be
adverse if produced;
(f) That money paid by one to another was due to
the latter;
(g) That a thing delivered by one to another
belonged to the latter;
(h) That an obligation delivered up to the debtor has
been paid;
(i) That prior rents or installments had been paid
when a receipt for the later ones is produced;
(j) That a person found in possession of a thing
taken in the doing of a recent wrongful act is the
taker and the doer of the whole act; otherwise,
that things which a person possesses, or exercises
acts of ownership over, are owned by him;
(k) That a person in possession of an order on himself
for the payment of the money, or the delivery of
anything, has paid the money or delivered the
thing accordingly;
(l) That a person acting in a public office was
regularly appointed or elected to it;
(m) That official duty has been regularly performed;
(n) That a court, or judge acting as such, whether in
the Philippines or elsewhere, was acting in the
lawful exercise of jurisdiction;
(o) That all the matters within an issue raised in a
case were laid before the court and passed upon
by it; and in like manner that all matters within
an issue raised in a dispute submitted for
arbitration were laid before the arbitrators and
passed upon by them;
(p) That private transactions have been fair and
regular;
(q) That the ordinary course of business has been
followed;
(r) That there was a sufficient consideration for a
contract;
(s) That a negotiable instrument was given or
indorsed for a sufficient consideration;
(t) That an indorsement of a negotiable instrument
LA SALLIAN COMMISION ON BAR OPERATIONS
4 REMEDIAL LAW
was made before the instrument was overdue and
at the place where the instrument is dated;
(u) That a writing is truly dated;
(v) That a letter duly directed and mailed was
received in the regular course of the mail;
(w) That after an absence of seven years, it being
unknown whether or not the absentee still lives,
he is considered dead for all purposes, except for
those of succession.
The absentee shall not be considered dead for
the purpose of opening his succession till after an
absence of ten years. If he disappeared after the
age of seventy-five years, an absence of five
years shall be sufficient in order that his
succession may be opened.
The following shall be considered dead for all
purposes including the division of the estate
among the heirs:
(1) A person on board a vessel lost during a sea
voyage, or an aircraft which is missing, who
has not been heard of for four years since
the loss of the vessel or aircraft;
(2) A member of the armed forces who has
taken part in armed hostilities, and has been
missing for four years;
(3) A person who has been in danger of death
under other circumstances and whose
existence has not been known for four years;
(4) If a married person has been absent for four
consecutive years, the spouse present may
contract a subsequent marriage if he or she
has a well-founded belief that the absent
spouse is already dead. In case of
disappearance, where there is danger of
death under the circumstances hereinabove
provided an absence of only two years shall
be sufficient for the purpose of contracting a
subsequent marriage. However, in any case,
before marrying again, the spouse present
must institute a summary proceeding as
provided in the Family Code and in the rules
for a declaration of presumptive death of the
absentee, without prejudice to the effect of
reappearance of the absent spouse.
(x) That acquiescence resulted from a belief that the
thing acquiesced in was conformable to the law
or fact;
(y) That things have happened according to the
ordinary course of nature and the ordinary habits
of life;
(z) That persons acting as copartners have entered
into a contract of copartnership;
(aa) That a man and woman deporting themselves as
husband and wife have entered into a lawful
contract of marriage;
(bb) That property acquired by a man and woman who
are capacitated to marry each other and who live
exclusively with each other as husband and wife
without the benefit of marriage or under a void
 EVIDENCE
marriage, has been obtained by their joint
efforts, work or industry.
(cc) That in cases of cohabitation by a man and a
woman who are not capacitated to marry each
other and who have acquired property through
their actual joint contribution of money, property
or industry, such contributions and their
corresponding shares including joint deposits of
money and evidences of credit are equal.
(dd) That if the marriage is terminated and the
mother contracted another marriage within three
hundred days after such termination of the
former marriage, these rules shall govern in the
absence of proof to the contrary:
(1) A child born before one hundred eighty days
after the solemnization of the subsequent
marriage is considered to have been
conceived during the former marriage,
provided it be born within three hundred
days after the termination of the former
marriage;
(2) A child born after one hundred eighty days
following the celebration of the subsequent
marriage is considered to have been
conceived during such marriage, even though
it be born within the three hundred days
after the termination of the former
marriage.
(ee) That a thing once proved to exist continues as
long as is usual with things of that nature;
(ff) That the law has been obeyed;
(gg) That a printed or published book, purporting to
be printed or published by public authority, was
so printed or published;
(hh) That a printed or published book, purporting to
contain reports of cases adjudged in tribunals of
the country where the book is published, contains
correct reports of such cases;
(ii) That a trustee or other person whose duty it was
to convey real property to a particular person has
actually conveyed it to him when such
presumption is necessary to perfect the title of
such person or his successor in interest;
(jj) That except for purposes of succession, when two
persons perish in the same calamity, such as
wreck, battle, or conflagration, and it is not
shown who died first, and there are no particular
circumstances from which it can be inferred, the
survivorship is determined from the probabilities
resulting from the strength and age of the sexes,
according to the following rules:
(1) If both were under the age of fifteen years,
the older is deemed to have survived;
(2) If both were above the age of sixty, the
younger is deemed to have survived;
(3) If one is under fifteen and the other above
sixty, the former is deemed to have survived;
(4) If both be over fifteen and under sixty, and
the sex be different, the male is deemed to
have survived; if the sex be the same, the
older;
LA SALLIAN COMMISION ON BAR OPERATIONS
5 REMEDIAL LAW
(5) If one be under fifteen or over sixty, and the
other between those ages, the latter is
deemed to have survived.
(kk) That if there is a doubt, as between two or more
persons who are called to succeed each other, as
to which of them died first, whoever alleges the
death of one prior to the other, shall prove the
same; in the absence of proof, they shall be
considered to have died at the same time.(5a)
SEC. 4. No presumption of legitimacy or illegitimacy,
Rule 131
There is no presumption of legitimacy or illegitimacy
of a child born after three hundred days following the
dissolution of the marriage or the separation of the
spouses. Whoever alleges the legitimacy or
illegitimacy of such child must prove his allegation.(6)
I. LIBERAL CONSTRUCTION OF RULES OF
EVIDENCE
The Rules of Court shall be liberally construed, among
such rules are: 1) the RULES ON EVIDENCE (Sec. 6,
Rule 1, Rules of Court); and, 2) the RULES ON
ELECTRONIC EVIDENCE (Sec. 2, Rule 2, Rules on
Electronic Evidence)
J. QUANTUM OF EVIDENCE
PROOF BEYOND REASONABLE DOUBT
moral certainty only is required, or that degree of
proof which produces conviction in an unprejudiced
mind(Sec. 2, Rule 133)
PREPONDERANCE OF EVIDENCE
only requires that evidence be greater or more
convincing than the opposing evidence(Duarte v.
Duran, GR No. 173038, September 14, 2011)
SUBSTANTIAL EVIDENCE
Substantial evidence is defined as such amount of
relevant evidence which a reasonable mind might
accept as adequate to justify a conclusion.
(Travelaire & Tours Corp. v. NLRC and Medelyn, GR
No. 131523, August 20, 1998)
CLEAR AND CONVINCING EVIDENCE
Evidence which produces in the mind of the trier of
fact firm belief or conviction as to allegations sought
to be established(Black’s Law Dictionary, 5th Ed., p.
227)
Intermediate than preponderance, but not to the
extent of such certainty as is required by beyond
reasonable doubt as in criminal cases. (RIANO, p. 142)
 EVIDENCE
II. Judicial Notice
and Judicial
Admissions
A. What Need Not Be Proved
B. Matters of Judicial Notice
C. Judicial Admissions
D. Judicial Notice of Foreign Laws, Law of
Nations and Municipal Ordinance
A. WHAT NEED NOT BE PROVED
(1) Facts which a court shall or may take judicial
notice. (Secs. 1 and 2, Rule 129, ROC)
(2) Judicial admissions. (Sec. 4, Rule 129, ROC)
(3) Facts which may be presumed from proven facts.
B. MATTERS OF JUDICIAL NOTICE
Judicial Notice – the cognizance of certain facts
which judges may properly take and act on without
proof because they are already known to them
(People v. Tundag, GR Nos. 135695-96, October 12,
2000)
Judicial Notice is based on convenience and
expediency. It relieves the parties from the necessity
of introducing evidence to prove the fact noticed.
The taking of judicial notice is a matter of expediency
and convenience for it fulfills the purpose that the
evidence is intended to achieve, and in this sense, it
is equivalent to proof. (Land Bank of the Philippines
vs. Yatco Agricultural Enterprises, GR No. 172551,
January 15, 2014)
Judicial Notice relieves the parties from the necessity
of introducing evidence to prove the fact noticed
(Francisco, Evidence, 1996)
When Court May Take Judicial Notice
(1) During trial;
(2) After trial and before judgment;
(3) On Appeal
B.1. MANDATORY
RULE 129
SEC 1. Judicial notice, when mandatory.—A court
shall take judicial notice, without the introduction
of evidence, of the existence and territorial extent
of states, their political history, forms of government
and symbols of nationality, the law of nations, the
admiralty and maritime courts of the world and their
seals, the political constitution and history of the
Philippines, the official acts of the legislative,
executive and judicial departments of the Philippines,
the laws of nature, the measure of time, and the
geographical divisions.(1a)
LA SALLIAN COMMISION ON BAR OPERATIONS
6 REMEDIAL LAW
Judicial Notice is MANDATORY in the following
instances:
(1) Existence and territorial extent of states;
(2) Their political history, forms of government and
symbols of nationality;
(3) The law of nations;
(4) The admiralty and maritime courts of the world
and their seals;
(5) The political constitution and history of the
Philippines;
(6) the official acts of the legislative, executive and
judicial departments of the Philippines
(7) The laws of nature;
(8) The measure of time; and
(9) The geographical divisions.
Note: Enumeration on Mandatory Judicial Notice is
EXCLUSIVE
RULE ON JUDICIAL NOTICE OF DECISIONS OF
COURTS
GENERAL RULE: ALL courts are required to take
judicial notice of the decisions of the Supreme Court.
Lower courts are to take JN of decisions of higher
courts (ex. CA) BUT NOT of the decisions of
coordinate trial courts NOR even of a decision or the
facts involved in another case tried by the same court
EXCEPTION: Parties introduce the same in evidence.
(The court, as a matter of convenience, decides to do
so.)
RULE ON ADJUDICATION OF CASES PENDING
GENERAL RULE: Courts are not authorized to take
judicial notice in the adjudication of cases pending
before them, of the contents 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 have been tried or are actually pending
before the same judge. (Prieto v. Arroyo, Jr., G.R.
No. L-17885, June 30, 1965)
EXCEPTION: In the absence of objection, and as a
matter of convenience to all parties, a court may
properly treat all or any part of the original record of
a case filed in its archives as read into the record of a
case pending before it, when, with the knowledge of
the opposing party, reference is made to it for that
purpose, by name and number or in some other
manner by which it is sufficiently designated; or when
the original record of the former case or any part of
it, is actually withdrawn from the archives by the
court's direction, at the request or with the consent
of the parties, and admitted as a part of the record of
the case then pending.
It is clear, though, that this exception is applicable
only when, "in the absence of objection," "with the
knowledge of the opposing party," or "at the request
or with the consent of the parties," the case is clearly
referred to or "the original or part of the records of
 EVIDENCE
the case are actually withdrawn from the archives"
and "admitted as part of the record of the case then
pending." (Tabuena vs. CA, G.R. No. 85423, May 6,
1991)
B.2. DISCRETIONARY
RULE 129
SEC.2. Judicial notice, when discretionary.—A court
may take judicial notice of matters which are of
public knowledge, or are capable of unquestionable
demonstration, or ought to be known to judges
because of their judicial functions.(1a)
Courts may take judicial notice on:
(a) Matters which are of public knowledge,
(b) Matters which are capable of unquestionable
demonstration, or
(c) Matters which ought to be known to judges
because of their judicial functions
For the court to take Judicial Notice, three material
requisites should be present:
(a) The matter must be one of common and general
knowledge;
(b) It must be well and authoritatively settled and
not doubtful or uncertain;
(c) It must be known to be within the limits of 
the
jurisdiction of the court.
(State Prosecutors v, Muro, A.M. No. RTJ-92-876)
JUDICIAL NOTICE VS. PERSONAL KNOWLEDGE
OF A JUDGE
It is not essential that matters of Judicial Notice be
actually known to the judge. The judge may, at his
discretion, inform himself in any way which may seem
best to him, and act accordingly.
C. JUDICIAL ADMISSIONS
RULE 129
SEC. 4. Judicial admissions.— An admission,
- verbal or written, made by a party in the course of
the proceedings in the same case, does not require
proof. The admission may be contradicted only by
showing that it was made through palpable mistake or
that no such admission was made.(2a)
Elements
(1) Must be made by a party to the case
(2) Must be made in the course of the proceedings in
the same case
(3) No particular form is required - may be oral or
written (RIANO, Evidence, p.170-171, 2013)
Judicial Admissions May be Made:
(1) In the pleadings filed by the parties
(2) In the course of the trial either by verbal or
written manifestations or stipulations
(3) In other stages of the judicial proceeding, as in
pre-trial of the case
LA SALLIAN COMMISION ON BAR OPERATIONS
7 REMEDIAL LAW
Note: Depositions, written interrogatories, or
requests for admission are also considered judicial
admissions
To be considered a Judicial Admission:
GENERAL RULE: It must be made in the SAME case in
which it is offered
EXCEPTION: It may be made in another case or
another court PROVIDED:
1. It be proved as in the case of any other fact
2. If the judicial admission was made in a judicial
proceeding, it is entitled to greater weight.
3. It is pertinent to the issue involved
4. There must be no objection
EXCEPTION TO THE EXCEPTION:
1. The said admissions were made only for purposes
of the first case as in the rule on implied
admissions and their effects under Rule 26
2. The same were withdrawn with the permission of
the court therein
3. The court deems it proper to relieve the party
therefrom.
C.1. EFFECT OF JUDICIAL ADMISSIONS
Judicial Admissions DO NOT REQUIRE PROOF. (Sec. 4,
Rule 129)
C.2. HOW JUDICIAL ADMISSIONS MAY BE
CONTRADICTED
GENERAL RULE: Judicial Admissions cannot be
contradicted by the admitter who is the party
himself. EXCEPTION: May be contradicted when:
(a) Such is made through palpable mistake;
(b) No such admission was made; or
(c) In the case of a pre-trial admission in a civil case,
to prevent manifest injustice (Sec 7, Rule 18)
Note: applies to criminal cases if the pre-trial
admission is reduced into writing and signed by the
accused and his counsel.
D. JUDICIAL NOTICE OF FOREIGN LAWS, LAW OF
NATIONS AND MUNICIPAL ORDINANCE
FOREIGN LAWS
GENERAL RULE: Foreign laws do not prove
themselves nor can a court take judicial notice of
them. Like any other fact, they must be alleged and
proved. (Garcia-Recio v. Garcia, GR No. 138322,
October 2, 2001)
EXCEPTION: When foreign laws may be the subject of
judicial notice
(1) When the local court is evidently familiar with
the foreign law.
(2) When the foreign law refers to the law of
nations. (Sec. 1, Rule 129, ROC)
(3) When the court takes judicial notice of a
published treatise, periodical or pamphlet on a
 EVIDENCE 8 REMEDIAL LAW

subject of law as a learned treatise. (Sec. 46,
Rule 130, Ibid.)
(4) When the foreign statute is accepted by the
Philippine government. (Republic v. Guanzon, 61
SCRA 360)
(5) When a foreign judgment containing foreign law
is recognized for enforcement. (Sec. 48, Rule 39,
ROC)
(6) If the foreign law refers to common law doctrines
and rules from which many of our laws were
derived. (Alzua v. Johnson, 21 Phil. 308)
How WRITTEN Foreign Law May be Proved
Requirements in Sec 24 and 25 of rule 132 must be
complied with:
(1) BY an official publication
(2) BY a duly attested and authenticated copy
thereof.
(a) Required to do so by statute (ex. city
charter); and
(b) In a case on appeal before them and wherein
the inferior court took JN of an ordinance
involved in said case. (only to determine the
propriety of taking JN)
(c) Appellate courts may also take JN of
municipal and city ordinances not only where
the lower courts took JN BEC these are facts
capable of unquestionable demonstration.
(d) For the same reason, Courts may take
judicial notice of administrative regulations.

Philippine courts cannot take judicial notice of

foreign laws. They must be alleged and proved as any
other fact. In the absence of such proof, the foreign
law is presumed to be the same as Philippine law.
(Yao Kee v. Sy-Gonzales, G.R. No. L-55960, November
24, 1988)

DOCTRINE OF PROCESSUAL PRESUMPTION

Under this doctrine, if the foreign law involved is not
properly pleaded and proved, our courts will presume
that the foreign law is the same as our local or
domestic or internal law. (Del Socorro v. Van Wil
Sem, GR No. 193707, December 10, 2014)

How UNWRITTEN Foreign Law May be Proved

Rule 130, Sec 46: A published treatise, periodical or
pamphlet on a subject of such law or a testimony of a
written expert.

LAW OF NATIONS
Article II, The 1987 Philippine Constitution
SEC. 2. The Philippines renounces war as an
instrument of national policy, adopts the generally
accepted principles of international law as part of the
law of the land and adheres to the policy of peace,
equality, justice, freedom, cooperation, and amity
with all nations.

The Philippines “..adopts the generally accepted

principles of international law as part of the law of
the land..” (Sec. 2, Art. II, 1987 Constitution)

MUNICIPAL ORDINANCES
General Rule: Courts of justice are required to take
Judicial Notice of the laws
Exception: In case of ORDINANCES, the rule is
different
(1) MTCs: Required to take JN of the ordinances of
the municipality or city wherein they sit.
(2) RTC however, they must take such JN ONLY
when:

LA SALLIAN COMMISION ON BAR OPERATIONS

 EVIDENCE 9 REMEDIAL LAW

III. Object (Real) (3) Experiments - making of an experiment

Evidence AS TO AUTHENTICATION OF AN OBJECT:

A. Nature of Object Evidence
B. Requisites for Admissibility
C. Categories of Object Evidence
D. Demonstrative Evidence
E. View of an Object or Scene
A. NATURE OF OBJECT EVIDENCE
What does object (real) evidence include?
Such evidence includes any article or object which
may be known or perceived by the use of any of the
senses of: hearing (auditory), touch (tactile), taste
(gustatory) or smell (olfactory)and sight
It may include:
✓ Examination of the anatomy of a person or any
substance taken therefrom
✓ Conducting tests, demonstration or experiments
✓ Examination of representative portrayals of the
object in question provided the same are
properly authenticated (ex. maps, diagrams,
sketches, pictures, audio-visual records)
✓ Documents – only if the same are presented for
the following purposes:
(1) To prove the existence or condition or the
nature of the handwritings thereon;
(2) To determine the age of the paper used or
the blemishes or alterations thereon
Note: Such real evidence may be amplified by
interpretations afforded by testimonial evidence
especially by experts (x-ray interpreted by doctors)
DOCUMENTS ARE CONSIDERED
(1) Object Evidence – if their Purpose is to prove
their existence or condition, or the nature of the
handwritings thereon or to determine the age of
the paper used, or the blemishes or alterations
thereon.
(2) Documentary Evidence - if their purpose is to
establish the contents or tenor thereof.
(1) Unique Objects – readily identifiable; objects
with unique marks
(2) Objects made Unique - made readily
identifiable; objects which acquired unique
characteristics
(3) Non-Unique Objects – not readily identifiable;
objects with no identifying marks and cannot be
marked
D. DEMONSTRATIVE EVIDENCE
What is Demontrative Evidence?
It is a tangible object that represents or demonstrates
the real thing.
To be admissible, it must show that the object fairly
represents or illustrates what is alleged to illustrate.
E. VIEW OF AN OBJECT OR SCENE
Requisites for Ocular Inspection or View of an Object
Or Scene
(1) Object is relevant
(2) Party cannot bring the object in the courtroom
(ex. Immovable or inconvenient to remove)
A view or Ocular Inspection conducted by the judge
without notice to or the presence of the parties is
invalid since an OI is part of the trial.
Whether or not an Ocular Inspection is to be made
lies in the discretion of the court.

B. REQUISITES FOR ADMISSIBILITY

Requisites for Admissibility of Object Evidence:
(1) Must be relevant
(2) Must be Authenticated
(3) Must be made by competent witness
(4) Object must be formally offered in evidence

C. CATEGORIES OF OBJECT EVIDENCE

AS TO PRESENTATION IN COURT:
(1) Exhibition or Production - The exhibition or
production of object inside or outside the
courtroom;
(2) View of an Object or Scene - the inspection of
the object outside the courtroom

LA SALLIAN COMMISION ON BAR OPERATIONS

 EVIDENCE 10 REMEDIAL LAW

IV. Documentary or other documents which cannot be examined in

court without great loss of time and the fact
Evidence sought to be established from them is only the
general result of the whole; and
A. Meaning of Documentary Evidence d. When the original is a public record in the
B. Requisites for Admissibility custody of a public officer or is recorded in a
C. Best Evidence Rule public office.(2a)
D. Parol Evidence Rule
E. Authentication and Proof of Documents Best Evidence Rule - the rule stipulates that in
proving the terms of a written document the original
A. MEANING OF DOCUMENTARY EVIDENCE of the document must be produced in court. (Heirs of
Prodon v. Heirs of Alvarez, GR No. 170604, Sept 2,
RULE 130 2013)
SEC. 2. Documentary evidence.—Documents as
evidence consist of writings or any material Purpose: To prevent fraud, perjury; and to exclude
containing letters, words, numbers, figures, symbols uncertainties in the contents of a document
or other modes of written expressions offered as
proof of their contents.(n) Best Evidence Rule is applied to Documentary
Evidence ONLY. Operates as a rule of exclusion
Categories of Documents:
✓ Writings; or C.2. WHEN APPLICABLE
✓ Any material containing letters, words, numbers,
figures, symbols GENERAL RULE: The rule excludes any evidence other
than the original writing to prove the contents
Document- deed, instrument or other duly authorized thereof (Id.)
paper by which something is proved, evidenced or set
forth. EXCEPTION:
(a) When the original has been lost or destroyed, or
Documentary Evidence- that which is furnished by cannot be produced in court, without bad faith
written instruments, inscriptions and documents of all on the part of the offeror;
kinds. (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;
B. REQUISITES FOR ADMISSIBILITY (c) When the original consists of numerous accounts
Requisites for admissibility of Documentary Evidence: or other documents which cannot be examined in
(1) The document must be relevant; court without great loss of time and the fact
(2) The evidence must be authenticated; sought to be established from them is only the
(3) The document must be authenticated by a general result of the whole; and
competent witness; and (d) When the original is a public record in the
(4) The document must be formally offered in custody of a public officer or is recorded in a
evidence. public office.
Effect: The non-production of the original document
gives rise to the presumption of suppression of
C. BEST EVIDENCE RULE evidence (Sec 131)

C.1. MEANING OF THE RULE C.3. MEANING OF ORIGINAL

RULE 130
RULE 130
SEC. 3. Original document must be produced;
SEC. 4. Original of document. — The original of a
exceptions.—When the subject of inquiry is the
document is one the contents of which are the
contents of a document, no evidence shall be
subject of inquiry.
admissible other than the original document itself, a. When a document is in two or more copies
except in the following cases:
executed at or about the same time, with
a. When the original has been lost or destroyed, or
identical contents, all such copies are
cannot be produced in court, without bad faith
equally regarded as originals.
on the part of the offeror;
When an entry is repeated in the regular course of
b. When the original is in the custody or under the business, one being copied from another at or near
control of the party against whom the evidence
the time of the transaction, all the entries are
is offered, and the latter fails to produce it
likewise equally regarded as originals.(3a)
after reasonable notice;
c. When the original consists of numerous accounts
Original- one the contents of which are the subject of

LA SALLIAN COMMISION ON BAR OPERATIONS

 EVIDENCE
inquiry
When “Other Copies of a Document” are Considered
Originals (Sec 4)
✓ It includes regular entries in journals and ledgers.
✓ A signed carbon copy executed at the same time
as the original is known as a “duplicate original”
and may be introduced w/o the original
Rules on Carbon Copies Considered as Originals
Documents prepared in several copies through the use
of carbon sheets are considered originals:
PROVIDED that the writing of a contract upon the
outside sheet, including the signature of the party
sought to be charged thereby, produces a facsimile
upon the sheets beneath, such signature being thus
reproduced by the SAME stroke of the pen
Even if the signature was made through separate acts
or separate occasions, ALL the CARBON COPIES are
considered originals
RULES ON TELEGRAMS AND CABLES
W/N the dispatch sent or the dispatch received is the
best evidence of the message (depends on the issue)
(1) IF the issue is the contents of the telegrams as
received by the addressee, original dispatch
received is the best evidence as sent by the
sender the original is the message delivered
(2) IF the issue is the inaccuracy of the transmission
BOTH the sent and received dispatch are originals.
C.4. REQUISITES FOR INTRODUCTION OF
SECONDARY EVIDENCE
RULE 130
SEC. 5. When original document is unavailable.—
When the original document has been lost or
destroyed, or cannot be produced in court, the
offeror, upon proof of its execution or existence and
the cause of its unavailability without bad faith on his
part, may prove its contents by a copy, or by a recital
of its contents in some authentic document, or by the
testimony of witnesses in the order stated.(4a)
Requisites for Introduction of Secondary Evidence IN
CASE OF LOSS OR DESTRUCTION:
(1) Prove the existence or due execution of the
original;
(2) Show cause for its unavailability; and
(3) Show the absence of bad faith on the part of the
offeror to which the unavailability of the original
can be attributed.
RULE 130
SEC. 6. When original document is in adverse party's
LA SALLIAN COMMISION ON BAR OPERATIONS
11 REMEDIAL LAW
custody or control.—If the document is in the custody
or under the control of the adverse party, he must
have reasonable notice to produce it. If after such
notice and after satisfactory proof of its existence, he
fails to produce the document, secondary evidence
may be presented as in the case of its loss.(5a)
Requisites for introduction of secondary evidence
WHEN THE ORIGINAL IS WITH THE ADVERSE PARTY:
(1) The original exists;
(2) The document is under the custody or control of
the adverse party;
(3) Proponent of the Secondary Evidence has given
the adverse party reasonable notice to produce
the original document; and
(4) Adverse party failed to produce the original
document despite reasonable notice.
Requisites for introduction of secondary evidence
WHEN THE ORIGINAL CONSISTS OF NUMEROUS
ACCOUNTS:
(1) The original consists of numerous accounts or
other documents;
(2) They cannot be examined in court without great
loss of time; and
(3) The fact sought to be established from them is
only the general result of the whole.
(Sec.3(c), Rule 130)
Voluminous records must, however, be made
accessible to the adverse party so that the
correctness of the summary of the voluminous records
may be tested on cross examination. (Compania
Maritima v. Allied Free Workers Union, 77 SCRA 24)
RULE 130
SEC. 7. Evidence admissible when original document
is a public record.—When the original of a document
is in the custody of a public officer or is recorded in a
public office, its contents may be proved by a
certified copy issued by the public officer in custody
thereof.(2a)
Requisites for introduction of secondary evidence
WHEN THE ORIGINAL IS A PUBLIC RECORD:
(1) Original is in the custody of a public officer or is
recorded in a public office;
(2) Prove contents by:
(a) Certified True Copy issued by the public
officer in custody thereof; or
(b) Official Publication
D. PAROL EVIDENCE RULE
RULE 130
SEC. 9. Evidence of written agreements.—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
 EVIDENCE 12 REMEDIAL LAW

other than the contents of the written agreement. (2) When parol evidence is NOT OBJECTED to (waiver
of right to object inadmissibility)
However, a party may present evidence to modify, Note: the Exceptions above are also the Grounds for
explain or add to the terms of the written agreement presenting Parol Evidence
if he puts in issue in his pleading:
(a) An intrinsic ambiguity, mistake or imperfection in Integrated Agreements – Parol Evidence Rule applies
the written agreement; only to integrated (finalized) agreements, intended
(b) The failure of the written agreement to express by both parties as the final and exclusive written
the true intent and agreement of the parties memorial of their agreement
thereto;
(c) The validity of the written agreement; or Collateral Oral Agreements – Parol Evidence Rule
(d) The existence of other terms agreed to by the may also apply to collateral oral agreements:
parties or their successors in interest after the (1) When the CA is not inconsistent with the terms of
execution of the written agreement. the written contract ;
(2) When the CA has not been integrated in and is
The term "agreement" includes wills.(7a) independent of the written contract as where it
is suppletory to the original contract;
Parol Evidence – Oral or verbal evidence; that which (3) When the CA is subsequent to or novatory of the
is given by wordof mouth; the ordinary kind of written contract;
evidence given by witnesses in court. In a particular (4) When the CA constitutes a condition precedent
sense, and with reference to contracts, deeds, wills, which determines whether the written contract
and other writings, parol evidence is the same as may become operative or effective.
extraneous evidence, or evidence aliunde. (Black’s
Law Dictionary, 5th Ed. , pp. 1005-1006) Parol Evidence Rule is NOT APPLICABLE (may not be
invoked against the other):
REQUISITES FOR APPLICABILITY (1) When at least 1 party to the suit is not a party or
privy to the written instrument in question and
(1) A valid contract; does not base a claim or assert a right originating
(2) Terms of the agreement must be reduced to in the instrument.
writing; (2) A stranger may introduce extrinsic evidence
(3) Dispute is between parties and their successors- against the written agreement.
in-interest;
(4) Grounds for applicability msust be put in issue in PAROL EVIDENCE RULE V. BEST EVIDENCE RULE
the pleadings; and
(5) There is a dispute as to the terms of the Parol Evidence Rule Best Evidence Rule
agreement. Contemplates a situation
where the original writing
Presupposes that the
APPLICABILITY is not available and/or
original document is
there is a dispute as to
available in court
GENERAL RULE: When the terms of an agreement w/n the said writing is the
have been reduced to writing, it is considered as original
containing all the terms agreed upon and there can Written agreements only Any document
be, between the parties and their successors in Prohibits the introduction
interest, no evidence of such terms other than the Prohibits the varying of the of secondary evidence
contents of the written agreement. terms of the written regardless of w/n it varies
EXCEPTION: When a party puts in issue in his agreement the contents of the
pleading: original
(1) An intrinsic ambiguity, mistake or imperfection in Applies ONLY to documents
the written agreement; which are contractual in
(2) The failure of the written agreement to express nature or “written Applies to all kinds of
the true intent and agreement of the parties agreement (EXC. It applies writings
to wills)
thereto;
(3) The validity of the written agreement; or
Can be invoked ONLY when
(4) The existence of other terms agreed to by the there is a controversy bet. Can be invoked by ANY
parties or their successors in interest after the the parties to the written party regardless of w/n
execution of the written agreement. agreement and their such party has participated
privies or any party in the writing involved.
EXCEPTION TO THE EXCEPTION: Parol Evidence may directly affected thereby
still be admitted even if the required matters are not Only the contracting
put in issue by the pleadings: May be challenged by
parties may challenge the
(1) If such facts are invoked in his answer (since it anyone
document
also puts it in issue) to exclude any evidence Exclude any evidence to

LA SALLIAN COMMISION ON BAR OPERATIONS

 EVIDENCE 13 REMEDIAL LAW

Parol Evidence Rule Best Evidence Rule If the record is not kept in the Philippines, such
that will vary, modify or prove content official publication or copy must be accompanied:
change contents of the (1) With a certificate that the attesting officer has
written agreement the legal custody thereof;
(2) Certificate stating, in substance
(a) Copy is a correct copy of the original, or
E. AUTHENTICATION AND PROOF OF (b) Specific part is a correct copy of the original
DOCUMENTS (3) Certificate issued by
(a) any of the authorized Philippine embassy or
E.1 MEANING OF AUTHENTICATION (b) consular officials stationed in the foreign
A condition precedent for the admiisibility of country in which the record is kept
evidence. (Black’s Law Dictionary, 5th Ed., p. 121) (4) Authenticated by the seal of his office.
(Rotterdam v. Glow Laks Enterprises, Ltd., GR No.
156330, November 19, 2014)
E.2. PUBLIC AND PRIVATE DOCUMENTS
RULE 132 Ratio: Not a mere technicality but is intended to
SEC. 19. Classes of documents.—For the purpose of justify the giving of full faith and credit to the
their presentation in evidence, documents are either genuineness of a document in a foreign country
public or private.
Public documents are: Public documents are perfect evidence of the fact
a. The written official acts, or records of the which gave rise to their execution and of the date of
official acts of the sovereign authority, official the latter, if the act which the officer witnessed and
bodies and tribunals, and public officers, whether certified to or the date written by him are not shown
of the Philippines, or of a foreign country; to be false; but they are not conclusive evidence with
b. Documents acknowledged before a notary public respect to the truthfulness of the statements made
except last wills and testaments; and therein by the interested parties. (Dupilas v.
c. Public records, kept in the Philippines, of private Cabacungan, 30 Phil 354, 1917)
documents required by law to be entered
therein.
All other writings are private.(20a) PUBLIC DOCUMENTS PRIVATE DOCUMENTS

CLASSES OF DOCUMENTS GENERAL RULE: NOT Self

Public Documents: A document acknowledged before Admissible in Authenticating.
persons authorized to administer oaths. “Official evidence w/o further It must be proved
Documents” proof of its relative to its due
(a) document to be public must be an official written genuineness and due execution and
As to Authenticity

act of a public officer; execution genuineness, before it

(b) Notarial Documents (except last wills and may be received in
testaments) EXCEPTION: Where a evidence
(c) A foreign decision purporting to be the written special rule of law
record of an act of an official body or tribunal of requires proof thereof
a foreign country is a public writing. despite its being a
document
Private Documents: all other writings; includes acknowledged
commercial documents. (ex. Probate of
notarial wills)
However, private documents required by law to be Evidence even against Binds only the parties
As to Persons

entered in public records may be considered as 3rd persons, of the who executed it or
Bound

“public documents” fact which gave rise their privies, insofar as

to its due execution due execution and date
Note: If a private writing itself is inserted officially and to the date of the of the document
into a public record, its record, its recordation or its latter concerned
incorporation into the public record becomes a public
document BUT that does NOT make the private
writing itself a public document so as to make it
admissible w/o authentication.

For the purpose of their presentation in evidence,

certain transactions must be in a public document;
otherwise they will not be given any validity.

LA SALLIAN COMMISION ON BAR OPERATIONS

 EVIDENCE
E.3. WHEN A PRIVATE WRITING REQUIRES
AUTHENTICATION; PROOF OF PRIVATE WRITING
RULE 132
SEC. 20. Proof of private document. - Before any
private document offered as authentic is received in
evidence, its due execution and authenticity must be
proved either:
a. By anyone who saw the document executed
or written; or
b. By evidence of the genuineness of the
signature or handwriting of the maker.
Any other private document need only be identified
as that which it is claimed to be.(21a)
E.4. WHEN EVIDENCE OF AUTHENTICITY OF A
PRIVATE WRITING IS NOT REQUIRED
RULE 132
SEC. 21. When evidence by authenticity of private
document not necessary. — Where the private
document is more than thirty years old, is produced
from a custody in which it would naturally be found if
genuine, and is unblemished by any alteration or
circumstances of suspicion, no other evidence of its
authenticity need be given.(22a)
Requisites:
(1) Document is more than thirty years old
(2) Document is produced from a custody in which it
would naturally be found if genuine, and
(3) Document is unblemished by any alteration or
circumstances of suspicion
An ancient document is said to be in the proper
custody if it is in the place in which and under the
care of the person with whom it would naturally be.
Ratio: The fact of its coming from the natural and
proper place tends to remove presumptions of fraud
and strengthen the belief of its genuineness
By merely producing the document: it establishes
prima facie its own authenticity. The burden then
shifts to the adverse party to prove otherwise.
E.5. HOW TO PROVE GENUINENESS OF A
HANDWRITING
RULE 132
SEC. 22. How genuineness of handwriting proved. -
The handwriting of a person may be proved by any
witness who believes it to be the handwriting of such
person because he has seen the person write, or has
seen writing purporting to be his upon which the
witness has acted or been charged, and has thus
acquired knowledge of the handwriting of such
person. Evidence respecting the handwriting may also
be given by a comparison, made by the witness or the
LA SALLIAN COMMISION ON BAR OPERATIONS
14 REMEDIAL LAW
court, with writings admitted or treated as genuine
by the party against whom the evidence is offered, or
proved to be genuine to the satisfaction of the
judge.(23a)
Means or methods by which the handwriting of a
person may be proven, which may be either by:
(1) Any witness who believes it to be the handwriting
of such person, and has seen the person write; or
(2) Any witness who has seen writing purporting to
be his upon which the witness has acted or been
charge and has thus acquired knowledge of the
handwriting of such person, or
(3) By comparison made by a witness or the court,
with writings admitted or treated as genuine by
the party against whom the evidence is offered,
or proved to be genuine to the satisfaction of the
judge.
(Lopez v. CA, L-31494, 23 Jan 1978)
E.6. PUBLIC DOCUMENTS AS EVIDENCE; PROOF
OF OFFICIAL RECORDS
RULE 132
SEC. 23. Public documents as evidence.—Documents
consisting of entries in public records made in the
performance of a duty by a public officer are prima
facie evidence of the facts therein stated. All other
public documents are evidence, even against a third
person, of the fact which gave rise to their execution
and of the date of the latter.(24a)
Requisites:
(1) Documents consisting of entries in public records
(2) Entries made by a public officer
(3) Entries made in the performance of a duty
Public documents are admissible w/o further proof of
their due execution and genuineness
RULE 132
SEC. 24. Proof of official record.—The record of
public documents referred to in paragraph (a) of
Section 19, when admissible for any purpose, may be
evidenced by an official publication thereof or by a
copy attested by the officer having the legal custody
of the record, or by his deputy, and accompanied, if
the record is not kept in the Philippines, with a
certificate that such officer has the custody. If the
office in which the record is kept is in a foreign
country, the certificate may be made by a secretary
of the embassy or legation, consul general, consul,
vice consul, or consular agent or by any officer in the
foreign service of the Philippines stationed in the
foreign country in which the record is kept, and
authenticated by the seal of his office.(25a)
Whether the Record is Domestic or Foreign – It may
be Evidenced By:
(1) An official publication
 EVIDENCE
(2) A copy thereof duly attested by the proper
officers
Note: Absent the attestation of the proper officer, a
mere copy of the foreign document is not admissible
as evidence to prove the foreign law.
When the special power of attorney is executed and
acknowledged before a notary public or other
competent official in a foreign country, it cannot be
admitted in evidence UNLESS it is certified as such in
accordance with the foregoing provision of the rules
by a secretary of embassy or legation, consul general,
consul, vice consul, or consular agent or by any
officer in the foreign service of the Philippines
stationed in the foreign country in which the record is
kept of said public document and authenticated by
the seal of his office.
E.7. ATTESTATION OF A COPY
RULE 132
SEC. 25. What attestation of copy must state -
Whenever a copy of a document or record is attested
for the purpose of evidence, the attestation must
state, in substance, that the copy is a correct copy of
the original, or a specific part thereof, as the case
may be. The attestation must be under the official
seal of the attesting officer, if there be any, or if he
be the clerk of a court having a seal, under the seal
of such court.(26a)
E.8. PUBLIC RECORD OF A PRIVATE DOCUMENT
RULE 132
SEC. 27. Public record of a private document.—An
authorized public record of a private document may
be proved by the original record, or by a copy
thereof, attested by the legal custodian of the
record, with an appropriate certificate that such
officer has the custody .(28a)
Note: If a private writing itself is inserted officially
into a public record, its record, its recordation or its
incorporation into the public record becomes a public
document BUT that does NOT make the private
writing itself a public document so as to make it
admissible w/o authentication.
E.9. PROOF OF LACK OF RECORD
RULE 132
SEC. 28. Proof of lack of record.—A written
statement signed by an officer having the custody of
an official record or by his deputy that after diligent
search no record or entry of a specified tenor is found
to exist in the records of his office, accompanied by a
certificate as above provided, is admissible as
evidence that the records of his office contain no
such record or entry.(29)
LA SALLIAN COMMISION ON BAR OPERATIONS
15 REMEDIAL LAW
E.10. HOW JUDICIAL RECORD IS IMPEACHED
RULE 132
SEC. 29. How judicial record impeached.—Any
judicial record may be impeached by evidence of:
a. want of jurisdiction in the court or judicial
officer,
b. collusion between the parties, or
c. fraud in the party offering the record, in
respect to the proceedings.(30a)
E.11. PROOF OF NOTARIAL DOCUMENTS
RULE 132
SEC. 30. Proof of notarial documents.—Every
instrument duly acknowledged or proved and certified
as provided by law, may be presented in evidence
without further proof, the certificate of
acknowledgment being prima facie evidence of the
execution of the instrument or document
involved.(31a)
Notarial Document - One which is duly acknowledged
before a notary public. (It is a public document)
The notary must be duly authorized and must have
notarized said document in accordance with the
Notarial Law.
Probative Value of a Notarial Document
It is evidence of the facts expressed therein
E.12. HOW TO EXPLAIN ALTERATIONS IN A
DOCUMENT
RULE 132
SEC. 31. Alterations in document, how to explain.—
The party producing a document as genuine which has
been altered and appears to have been altered after
its execution, in a part material to the question in
dispute, must account for the alteration. He may
show that the alteration was made by another,
without his concurrence, or was made with the
consent of the parties affected by it, or was
otherwise properly or innocently made, or that the
alteration did not change the meaning or language of
the instrument. If he fails to do that, the document
shall not be admissible in evidence.(32a)
The rule requires that a party, producing a writing as
genuine but which is found altered after its
execution, in a part material to the question in
dispute, should account for the alteration, and if he
does that, may give the writing in evidence, but not
otherwise. In other words, a party presenting the
writing should have accounted for the alteration
when he introduced the paper in evidence, and not
endeavor to explain the alteration afterwards.
 EVIDENCE 16 REMEDIAL LAW

The claim on appeal that the alteration in the writing

was innocent, or that the company should have been V. Testimonial
given an opportunity to explain because it was caught
unaware that the court below would take the incident Evidence
against them as it did, is untenable. (Vda. De A. Qualifications of a Witness
Bonifacio v. BLT Bus Co., Inc., 34 SCRA 618, 1970) B. Competency versus Credibility of a Witness
C. Disqualifications of Witnesses
D. Examination of a Witness
E.13. DOCUMENTARY EVIDENCE IN AN E. Admissions and Confessions
UNOFFICIAL LANGUAGE F. Hearsay Rule
G. Opinion Rule
RULE 132 H. Character Evidence
SEC. 33. Documentary evidence in an unofficial
language.—Documents written in an unofficial
language shall not be admitted as evidence, unless
A. QUALIFICATIONS OF A WITNESS
accompanied with a translation into English or RULE 130
Filipino. To avoid interruption of proceedings, parties SEC. 20. Witnesses; their qualifications.—Except as
or their attorneys are directed to have such provided in the next succeeding section, all persons
translation prepared before trial.(34a) who can perceive, and perceiving, can make known
their perception to others, may be witnesses.

Religious or political belief, interest in the outcome

of the case, or conviction of a crime unless otherwise
provided by law, shall not be a ground for
disqualification.(18a)

GENERAL RULE: All persons who can perceive, and in

perceiving, can make known their perception to
others, may be witnesses.
The following shall not be a ground for
disqualification:
(1) Religious or political belief,
(2) interest in the outcome of the case, or
(3) conviction of a crime

EXCEPTIONS: When law provides otherwise, such as:

(1) Disqualification by reason of mental capacity or
immaturity (Sec. 21, Rule 130)
(2) Disqualification by reason of marriage (Sec. 22,
Rule 130)
(3) Disqualification by reason of death or insanity of
the adverse party (Sec. 23, Rule 130)
(4) Disqualification on the ground of privileged
communication (Sec. 24, Rule 130)

The fact that a person is mentally handicapped, alone

does not prevent her from giving testimony especially
if the testimony was candid, straightforward, and
coherent (People v. Baid, 336 SCRA 656 (2000))

B. COMPETENCY VERSUS CREDIBILITY OF A

WITNESS
Competency of a Witness Credibility of a Witness
Matter of law Has nothing to do with
the rules
As regards the Refers to the weight
qualifications and the and trustworthiness or
capacity of a witness to reliability of the
perceive and make his testimony
perception known

LA SALLIAN COMMISION ON BAR OPERATIONS

 EVIDENCE
C. DISQUALIFICATIONS OF A WITNESS
C.1. DISQUALIFICATION BY REASON OF MENTAL
CAPACITY OR IMMATURITY
RULE 132
SEC. 34. Offer of evidence.—The court shall consider
no evidence which has not been formally offered. The
purpose for which the evidence is offered must be
specified.(35)
GENERAL RULE: The court shall consider no evidence
which has not been formally offered. The purpose for
which the evidence is offered must be specified.
EXCEPTION: If there was repeated reference thereto
in the course of the trial by adverse party’s counsel
and of the court, indicating that the documents were
part of the prosecution’s evidence.
TWO REQUISITES MUST CONCUR:
(1) The document must have been duly identified by
testimony duly recorded.
(2) The document must have been incorporated to
the records of the case.
(Laborate v. Pagsanhan Tourism Consumers
Cooperative, GR No. 183860, January 15, 2014)
Evidence may be considered despite failure to
formally offer if exhibits which were not formally
offered by the prosecution were repeatedly referred
to in the course of the trial by the counsel of the
accused. (People v. Vivencio De Roxas et al., 116
Phil. 977, 1962)
PURPOSE WHY OFFER MUST BE SPECIFIED
To determine whether that piece of evidence should
be admitted or not because such evidence may be
admissible for several purposes under the doctrine of
multiple admissibility.
NECESSITY OF FOLLOWING WHAT IS STATED IN
THE OFFER
It must be rejected if it is inadmissible for the
purpose stated even if it is admissible for another
purpose.
COMPETENCY OF A CHILD WITNESS
(SEC 6)
Every child is presume qualified to be a witness.
However, the court shall c0nduct a competency
examination of a child, motu proprio or on motion of
a party, when it finds that substantial doubts exists
regarding the ability of the child to perceive,
remember, communicate, distinguish truth from
falsehood, or appreciate the duty to tell the truth in
court.
LA SALLIAN COMMISION ON BAR OPERATIONS
17 REMEDIAL LAW
C.2. DISQUALIFICATION BY REASON OF
MARRIAGE
RULE 130
Sec. 22 . Disqualification by reason of marriage. —
During their marriage, neither the husband nor the
wife may testify for or against the other without the
consent of the affected spouse, except in a civil case
by one against the other, or in a criminal case for a
crime committed by one against the other or the
latter's direct descendants or ascendants. (20a)
RULE ON MARITAL DISQUALIFICATION
(SPOUSAL IMMUNITY):
General Rule: During the marriage, neither the
husband nor the wife may testify for or against the
other w/o the consent of the affected spouse
Exceptions: Rule on Disqualification does NOT Apply
(1) When the testimony was made outside the
marriage
(2) In a civil case by one spouse against another
(3) In a criminal case for a crime committed by one
spouse against the other or the latter’s direct
descendants or ascendants
Reason: The crime may be considered as having been
committed against the spouse and hence, the
conjugal harmony sought to be protected no longer
exists)
Limited only to direct ascendants and descendants +
spouse
(1) When the offense directly attacks or vitally
impairs the conjugal relation. (People v.
Castañeda, 88 SCRA 562)
(2) When the marital relations are so strained, there
is no more consideration for applying the said
rule. Such as in cases of rape of the child, the
crime is tantamount to a crime against the wife.
(Ordonio v. Daquigan, 62 SCRA 270)
(3) When there is imputation of a crime by one
spouse against the other
Note: “Direct Ascendants and Descendants” = Parents
and Children ONLY
Nature of Prohibition: Absolute disqualification or
prohibition against the spouse’s testifying to any fact
affecting the other spouse however the fact may have
acquired
Requisites in Order for Marital Disqualification Rule to
Apply:
(1) The marriage is valid and existing at the time of
the offer of testimony; and
(2) The other spouse is a party to the action.
WHO MAY OBJECT:
Only the other spouse who is a party to the case.
 EVIDENCE
Objections to the competency of the witness-spouse
may also be waived. (Ex. Testimony against a spouse
is a waiver of a testimony in rebuttal)
RATIONALE FOR HAVING SUCH RULE
Considering the identity of interest between the
spouses, there is a consequent danger of committing
perjury. Also, the rule is in order to guard marital
confidence and to prevent domestic disunion
C.3. DISQUALIFICATION BY REASON OF DEATH
OR INSANITY OF ADVERSE PARTY
RULE 130
Sec. 23 . Disqualification by reason of death or
insanity of adverse party. — Parties or assignor of
parties to a case, or persons in whose behalf a case is
prosecuted, against an executor or administrator or
other representative of a deceased person, or against
a person of unsound mind, upon a claim or demand
against the estate of such deceased person or against
such person of unsound mind, cannot testify as to any
matter of fact occurring before the death of such
deceased person or before such person became of
unsound mind. (20a)
Survivorship Disqualification Rule or Dead Man Statute
Constitutes only a partial disqualification: A witness
is not completely disqualified BUT is only prohibited
from testifying in certain matters specified
Disqualification ONLY applies to:
A civil case or special proceeding over the estate of a
deceased or insane person
Incompetency to Testify Applies:
Whether or not the deceased died before or after the
commencement of the action against him provided he
is dead at the time of the testimony
Requisites
(1) The witness offered for examination is a party
plaintiff, or the assignor of said party, or a
person in whose behalf a case is prosecuted;
(2) The case is against the executor or administrator
or other representative of a person deceased or
of unsound mind;
(3) The case is upon a claim or demand against the
estate of such person who is deceased or of
unsound mind
(4) The testimony to be given is on matter of fact
occurring before the death, of such deceased
person or before such person became of unsound
mind.
The Rule Does NOT Apply:
(1) In Land registration cases instituted by the
decedent’s representatives (since the oppositors
are considered defendants and may therefore
testify against the petitioner)
LA SALLIAN COMMISION ON BAR OPERATIONS
18 REMEDIAL LAW
(2) In Cadastral cases – since there is no plaintiff or
defendant
(3) When the testimony is offered to prove a claim
less than what is established under a written
document or is intended to prove a fraudulent
transaction against the deceased
Provided such fraud is first established by evidence
aliunde.
To apply the rule, the testimony must be against the
estate.
When the disqualification is waived – when the
defendant:
(1) does not timely object to the admission of such
evidence or
(2) testifies on the prohibited matters or cross
examines thereon
(3) or offers evidence to rebut such prohibited
testimony
Reason for the Rule:
(1) To prevent perjury
(2) To protect the estate from fictitious claims
(3) To give the parties an equal opportunity to
present evidence
The object and purpose of this Statute is to close the
lips of the party plaintiff when death has closed the
lips of the party defendant, in order to remove from
the surviving party the temptation to falsehood and
the possibility of fictitious claims against the
deceased. (Goni v. CA, 144 SCRA 222, 1968 )
The protection under the Dead Man’s Statute is
deemed waived when the counsel cross-examines the
party who is claiming against the estate. (Id.)
C.4. DISQUALIFICATION BY REASON OF
PRIVILEGED COMMUNICATION
RULE 130
Sec. 24 . Disqualification by reason of privileged
communication. — The following persons cannot
testify as to matters learned in confidence in the
following cases:
(a) The husband or the wife, during or after the
marriage, cannot be examined without the
consent of the other as to any communication
received in confidence by one from the other
during the marriage except in a civil case by one
against the other, or in a criminal case for a
crime committed by one against the other or the
latter's direct descendants or ascendants;
(b) An attorney cannot, without the consent of his
client, be examined as to any communication
made by the client to him, or his advice given
thereon in the course of, or with a view to,
professional employment, nor can an attorney's
 EVIDENCE 19 REMEDIAL LAW

secretary, stenographer, or clerk be examined, Waiving Sec 22 does not prevent the spouse from
without the consent of the client and his invoking sec 24 and vice versa. So even if the
employer, concerning any fact the knowledge of information is not confidential, the spouse may still
which has been acquired in such capacity; invoke sec 22 which is an absolute disqualification.
(c) A person authorized to practice medicine,
surgery or obstetrics cannot in a civil case, This should NOT be confused w/ “Marital
without the consent of the patient, be examined Disqualification”
as to any advice or treatment given by him or any Marital Disqualification Marital Privilege
information which he may have acquired in (Sec. 22, Rule 130) (Sec. 24 (a), Rule 130 )
attending such patient in a professional capacity, Prohibits adverse Prohibits only as to
which information was necessary to enable him testimony regardless of knowledge obtained
to act in capacity, and which would blacken the source through marital
reputation of the patient; relations
(d) A minister or priest cannot, without the consent Applicable only when the Exists whether the
of the person making the confession, be party to an action is the husband or wife is a
examined as to any confession made to or any spouse party to the action or
advice given by him in his professional character not
in the course of discipline enjoined by the church Ceases upon death or Continues even after
to which the minister or priest belongs; divorce death or divorce
(e) A public officer cannot be examined during his Privilege belongs to either Privilege belongs to the
term of office or afterwards, as to spouse communicating spouse
communications made to him in official Includes all facts, Only protects those
confidence, when the court finds that the public occurrence or information information received
interest would suffer by the disclosure. (21a) obtained even prior the during the marriage
marriage
C.4.1. HUSBAND AND WIFE (MARITAL
PRIVILEGE) C.4.2. ATTORNEY – CLIENT
Requisites for the Disqualification By Reason of PRIVILEGE
Marital Privilege to Apply: Requisites for the Disqualification Based on Attorney-
(1) There is a valid marital relation; Client (A-C) Privilege to Apply
(2) The privilege is invoked with respect to a (1) There is an attorney and client relation;
confidential communication between the spouses (2) The privilege is invoked with respect to a
during said marriage; confidential communication between them in the
(3) The spouse against whom such evidence is being course of professional employment;
offered has not given his or her consent to such (3) The client has not given his consent to the
testimony. attorney’s testimony.

Instances When the Privilege Cannot Be Claimed:
(1) With respect to communications made prior to
the marriage of the spouses
(2) With respect to communication not intended to
be kept in confidence (ex. dying declaration of a
husband to his wife as to who was his assailant
since it is intended to be reported)(US v.
Antipolo, 37 Phil 726)
(3) When the information is overheard by a third
party whether he acquired the information
legally or not. (A 3rd person is not covered by the
prohibition) Provided: There is no collusion
between the 3rd person and one of the spouses.
(4) In a conspiracy between spouses to commit a
crime - since it is not the intention of the law to
protect the commission of a crime.
(5) When the spouses are living separately and there
is an active hostility. But if there is a chance to
reconcile, then this privilege will apply;
(6) When waived
Note: Any information received during the marriage is
presumed to be confidential
Communications with third persons may still be
deemed confidential when done with the agents of
either the attorney or the client.
The client owns the privilege and therefore he alone
can invoke it.
Prohibition is also applicable even to a counsel de
oficio.
CONFIDENTIAL COMMUNICATION
The attorney must have been consulted in his
professional capacity EVEN if no fee has been paid.
It includes preliminary communications made for the
purpose of creating the A-C relationship. (But if it is
not for the purpose of creating the A-C relationship –
it will not be protected even if the client
subsequently hires the same attorney)
Includes verbal statements as well as documents or
papers entrusted to the attorney

LA SALLIAN COMMISION ON BAR OPERATIONS

 EVIDENCE
Instances when the A-C Privilege Does NOT Apply:
(1) Intended to be made public;
(2) Intended to be communicated to others;
(3) Intended for an unlawful purpose;
(4) Received from third person not acting in behalf
or as agent of the client;
(5) Made in the presence of third parties who are
strangers to the attorney-client relationship.
The period to be considered is:
The date when the privileged communication was
made by the client to the attorney in relation to
either a crime committed in the past or with respect
to a crime intended to be committed in the future.
The lawyer-client confidentiality privilege and
lawyer's loyalty to his client is evident in the duration
of the protection, which exists not only during the
relationship, but extends even after the termination
of the relationship.(Regala v. Sandiganbayan, GR No.
105938, September 20, 1996)
BUT Communication Regarding:
✓ A crime already committed - is privileged
communication
✓ Contemplated criminal acts or in aid or
furtherance thereof - is not covered.
The A-C Privilege Does NOT Attach:
(1) When the attorney is a conspirator
(2) When all the attorney has to do is to either
affirm or deny the secret revealed by the client
to the court
(3) When the information is voluntarily given after
the attorney has refused to accept employment.
C.4.3. PHYSICIAN – PATIENT
PRIVILEGE
Purpose: It is intended to facilitate confidential
disclosure by a patient to a physician of all facts and
symptoms w/o apprehension to the end that the
physician may form a correct opinion and may safely
treat his patient.
Requisites for the Disqualification Based on Physician-
Patient (P-P) Privilege to Apply
(1) The physician is authorized to practice medicine,
surgery, or obstetrics;
(2) The information was acquired or the advice or
treatment was given by him in his professional
capacity for the purpose of treating and curing
the patient;
(3) The information, advice or treatment, if
revealed, would blacken the reputation of the
patient;
(4) The privilege is invoked in a civil case, whether
patient is a party or not.
Note: It is not necessary that the P-P relationship was
created through the voluntary act of the patient.
Death of the patient does not extinguish the relation.
LA SALLIAN COMMISION ON BAR OPERATIONS
20 REMEDIAL LAW
The privilege extends to all forms of communications
as well as to the professional observations and
examinations of the patient
The P-P Privilege Does NOT Attach when:
(1) The communication was not given in confidence;
(2) The communication is irrelevant to the
professional employment;
(3) The communication was made for an unlawful
purpose, as when it is intended for the
commission or concealment of a crime;
(4) The information was intended to be made public;
(5) There was a waiver of the privilege either by
provisions of contract or law.
(6) Under Rule 28 of the Rules of Court,
The results of the physical and mental examination of
a person, when ordered by the court, are intended to
be made public, hence not privileged.
Also, result of autopsies or post mortem examinations
are generally intended to be divulged in court.
The Privilege May Also be Waived:
Ex. Section 4 of said Rule 28: if the party examined
obtains a report on said examination or takes the
deposition of the examiner, he thereby waives any
privilege regarding any other examination of said
physical or mental condition conducted or to be
conducted on him by any other physician.
Ex. Waiver of the privilege by contract may be found
in stipulations in life insurance policies.
C.4.4. PRIEST – PENITENT
PRIVILEGE
Requisites for the Disqualification Based on
Minister/Priest-Penitent Privilege to Apply
(1) That the same were made pursuant to a religious
duty enjoined in the course of discipline of the
sect or denomination to which they belong; and
(2) They must be confidential and penitential in
character.
Note: It is the person making the confession who can
invoke the privilege.
C.4.5. PRIVILEGED COMMUNICATION
TO PUBLIC OFFICERS
Requisites for the Disqualification Based on Privileged
Communication to Public Officers to Apply
(1) That it was made to the public officer in official
confidence;
(2) That public interest would suffer by the
disclosure of such communication, as in the case
of State secrets.
Note: When no public interest will be prejudiced -
this rule will NOT apply.
 EVIDENCE
OTHER INSTANCES OF PRIVILEGE
(1) RA 53 as amended by RA 1477, the publisher,
editor or duly accredited reporter of any
newspaper, magazine or periodical of general
circulation cannot be compelled to reveal the
source of any news report or information
appearing in said publication unless the court or
a House or committee of Congress finds that such
revelation is demanded by the Security of the
State.
(2) Art. 233 of the Labor Code - All information and
statements made at conciliation proceedings
shall be treated as privileged communications
and shall not be used as evidence in the NLRC,
and conciliators and similar officials shall not
testify in any court regarding any matter taken
up at the conciliation proceedings conducted by
them.
(3) Voters cannot be compelled to reveal their
ballots
(4) Trade Secrets will be covered by this privilege
(5) Informer’s Privilege: Prosecutor is not to be
compelled to dispose the identity of the informer
unless the informer is already known to the
accused and when the identity of the informer is
vital.
(6) Those covered in the Secrecy of Bank Deposits
Law
(7) EO 464: Executive Privilege
(8) Income Tax returns
(9) Anti-Graft Cases
C.4.6. PARENTAL AND FILIAL
PRIVILEGE RULE
RULE 130
Sec. 25 . Parental and filial privilege. — No person
may be compelled to testify against his parents, other
direct ascendants, children or other direct
descendants. (20a)
It is not a rule of disqualification but is a privilege
NOT to testify.
Parental Privilege – Parent cannot be compelled to
testify against his child or direct descendants
Filial Privilege- Child may not be compelled to testify
against his parents or other direct ascendants
RULE UNDER THE FAMILY CODE
General Rule: No descendant may be compelled to
testify against his parents and grandparents
Exception:
(1) if such testimony is indispensable in prosecuting
a crime against the descendant; or
(2) by one parent against the other
(Art. 215, The Family Code)
Both parental and filial privileges are granted to any
LA SALLIAN COMMISION ON BAR OPERATIONS
21 REMEDIAL LAW
person. Persons may voluntary testify, but if they
choose to refuse, the rule protects them.
Reason for the Rule: The reason for the rule is to
preserve “family cohesion”
Note: The privilege may now be invoked in both civil
and criminal cases.
D. EXAMINATION OF A WITNESS
RULE 132
SECTION 1. Examination to be done in open court.—
The examination of witnesses presented in a trial or
hearing shall be done in open court, and under oath
or affirmation. Unless the witness is incapacitated to
speak, or the question calls for a different mode of
answer, the answers of the witness shall be given
orally.(1a)
SEC. 2. Proceedings to be recorded.—The entire
proceedings of a trial or hearing, including the
questions propounded to a witness and his answers
thereto, the statements made by the judge or any of
the parties, counsel, or witnesses with reference to
the case, shall be recorded by means of shorthand or
stenotype or by other means of recording found
suitable by the court.
A transcript of the record of the proceedings made by
the official stenographer, stenotypist or recorder and
certified as correct by him shall be deemed prima
facie a correct statement of such proceedings.(2a)
RULES FOR ADMISSIBILITY
GENERAL RULE: The testimony of the witness must
be given in open
EXCEPTION: Such requirement may be supplanted
(1) In civil cases
by depositions pursuant to and under the
limitations of Rules 23 and 24
(2) In criminal cases
by depositions or conditional examinations,
pursuant to Sec 12 to 15 Rule 119 and Rule 123,
or by the records of the preliminary investigation
HOW ORAL EVIDENCE IS GIVEN
GENERAL RULE: It is usually given orally in open
court. Therefore, generally, the testimonies of
witnesses cannot be presented in affidavits.
EXCEPTION: Testimonies of witnesses may be given in
affidavits is under the Rules of Summary Procedure
(BP 129)
Purpose: to enable the court to judge the credibility
of the witness by the witness’ manner of testifying,
their intelligence, and appearance.
 EVIDENCE
Testimony of witnesses shall be given under oath or
affirmation.
Two fold object in requiring a witness to be sworn:
(1) By affecting the conscience of the witness to
compel him to speak the truth;
(2) If he willfully falsifies that truth, that he may be
punished by perjury.
The right to have the witness sworn may be waived
If a party fails to object to the taking of the
testimony of a witness without the administration of
an oath, he will be deemed to have waived his
objection.
How Testimony of the Witness Should be Elicited
(1) By question of counsel
(2) The court may also propound questions either on
the direct or cross-examination of the witness or
suggest questions to counsel.
Note: The testimony of a witness cannot be
considered self-serving if he is subjected to cross-
examination.
Questions propounded to a witness must:
(1) Not be indefinite or uncertain;
(2) Be relevant;
(3) Not be argumentative;
(4) Not for conclusion of law;
(5) Not call for opinion or hearsay evidence;
(6) Not call for illegal answer;
(7) Not call for self-incriminating testimony;
(8) Not be leading;
(9) Not be misleading;
(10) Not to tend reputation of witness;
(11) Not to be repetitions;
(12) Not call for a narration.
D.1. JUDICIAL AFFIDAVIT RULE
D.1.1. SCOPE AND WHERE APPLICABLE
Judicial Affidavit Rule (AM No. 12-8-8 SC)
Section 1. Scope. - (a) This Rule shall apply to all
actions, proceedings, and incidents requiring the
reception of evidence
Rule shall apply to:
(a) Actions,
(b) Proceedings, or
(c) Incidents requiring the reception of evidence
Rule shall applies to all courts, other than the
Supreme Court
The rule specifies the following courts and bodies:
(1) The Metropolitan Trial Courts, the Municipal Trial
Courts in Cities, the Municipal Trial Courts, the
Municipal Circuit Trial Courts, and the Shari' a
Circuit Courts but shall not apply to small claims
LA SALLIAN COMMISION ON BAR OPERATIONS
22 REMEDIAL LAW
cases under A.M. 08-8-7-SC;
(2) The Regional Trial Courts and the Shari'a District
Courts;
(3) The Sandiganbayan, the Court of Tax Appeals,
the Court of Appeals, and the Shari'a Appellate
Courts;
(4) The investigating officers and bodies authorized
by the Supreme Court to receive evidence,
including the Integrated Bar of the Philippine
(IBP); and
(5) The special courts and quasi-judicial bodies,
whose rules of procedure are subject to
disapproval of the Supreme Court, insofar as
their existing rules of procedure contravene the
provisions of this Rule.
(Sec .1(a), Judicial Affidavit Rule)
D.1.2. CONTENTS AND PROCEDURE
Judicial Affidavit Rule (AM No. 12-8-8 SC)
Section 3. Contents of judicial Affidavit. - A judicial
affidavit shall be prepared in the language known to
the witness and, if not in English or Filipino,
accompanied by a translation in English or Filipino,
and shall contain the following:
(a) The name, age, residence or business address,
and occupation of the witness;
(b) The name and address of the lawyer who
conducts or supervises the examination of the
witness and the place where the examination is
being held;
(c) A statement that the witness is answering the
questions asked of him, fully conscious that he
does so under oath, and that he may face
criminal liability for false testimony or perjury;
(d) Questions asked of the witness and his
corresponding answers, consecutively numbered,
that:
(1) Show the circumstances under which the
witness acquired the facts upon which he
testifies;
(2) Elicit from him those facts which are
relevant to the issues that the case presents;
and
(3) Identify the attached documentary and
object evidence and establish their
authenticity in accordance with the Rules of
Court;
(e) The signature of the witness over his printed
name; and
(f) A jurat with the signature of the notary public
who administers the oath or an officer who is
authorized by law to administer the same.
 EVIDENCE
D.1.3. APPLICATION TO CRIMINAL
ACTIONS
Judicial Affidavit Rule (AM No. 12-8-8 SC)
Section 9. Application of rule to criminal actions. –
(a) This rule shall apply to all criminal actions:
(1) Where the maximum of the imposable
penalty does not exceed six years;
(2) Where the accused agrees to the use of
judicial affidavits, irrespective of the
penalty involved; or
(3) With respect to the civil aspect of the
actions, whatever the penalties involved are.
(b) The prosecution shall submit the judicial
affidavits of its witnesses not later than five days
before the pre-trial, serving copies if the same
upon the accused. The complainant or public
prosecutor shall attach to the affidavits such
documentary or object evidence as he may have,
marking them as Exhibits A, B, C, and so on. No
further judicial affidavit, documentary, or object
evidence shall be admitted at the trial.
(c) If the accused desires to be heard on his defense
after receipt of the judicial affidavits of the
prosecution, he shall have the option to submit
his judicial affidavit as well as those of his
witnesses to the court within ten days from
receipt of such affidavits and serve a copy of
each on the public and private prosecutor,
including his documentary and object evidence
previously marked as Exhibits 1, 2, 3, and so on.
These affidavits shall serve as direct testimonies
of the accused and his witnesses when they
appear before the court to testify.
Rule: The Judicial Affidavit Rule shall apply to
criminal cases.
Basis: Criminal cases are actions which require the
reception of evidence. (RIANO, supra, p. 419)
LIMITATIONS IN THE APPLICABILITY OF THE RULE
This rule shall apply to all criminal actions:
(1) Where the maximum of the imposable penalty
does not exceed six years;
(2) Where the accused agrees to the use of judicial
affidavits, irrespective of the penalty involved;
or
(3) With respect to the civil aspect of the actions,
whatever the penalties involved are.
The Judicial Affidavit Rule still applies:
(1) The accused opts its application, or
(2) With respect to the civil aspect of the criminal
action
In other cases, the use of the judicial affidavits will
now depend on the accused. The rule will apply,
irrespective of the penalty involved, where the
accused agrees to the use of the judicial affidavits.
(RIANO, supra, p. 419)
LA SALLIAN COMMISION ON BAR OPERATIONS
23 REMEDIAL LAW
The civil aspect of the criminal action refers to the
action to recover the civil liability “arising from the
offense charged” and which is deemed instituted with
the criminal action as provided in Sec. 1 of Rule 111
of the Rules of Court. (RIANO, supra, p. 419-420)
D.1.4. EFFECT OF NON-COMPLIANCE
Party’s failure to submit – deemed to waived their
submission of the required judicial affidavits and
exhibits. (Note: The Court may allow only once the
late submission of the same, provided: 1) the delay is
for a valid reason; 2) would not unduly prejudice the
opposing party; and, 3) the defaulting party pays a
fine not less than P1,000.00 nor more than P5,000.00,
at the discretion of the court.)
Witness’ failure to appear at the scheduled hearing
– Court shall not consider the affidavit.
Counsel’s failure to appear at the scheduled
hearing – if without valid cause despite notice, he
shall be deemed to have waived his client’s right to
cross examine the witnesses presented.
Non-conformity with the content requirements –
Court shall not admit the Judicial Affidavit as
evidence.
(Sec. 10, AM No. 12-8-8 SC)
D.1.5. EFFECT ON OTHER RULES
Provisions which are incosistent with the Judicial
Affidavit Rule:
✓ Repealed or modified - Rules of Court; Rules of
procedure of investigating bodies authorized by
the Supreme Court
✓ Disapproved - Rules of procedure of governing
quasi-judicial bodies
(Sec. 11, AM No. 12-8-8 SC)
D.2. RIGHTS AND OBLIGATIONS OF A WITNESS
RULE 132
SEC. 3. Rights and obligations of a witness.—A witness
must answer questions, although his answer may tend
to establish a claim against him. However, it is the
right of a witness:
(1) To be protected from irrelevant, improper, or
insulting questions, and from harsh or insulting
demeanor;
(2) Not to be detained longer than the interests of
justice require;
(3) Not to be examined except only as to matters
pertinent to the issue;
(4) Not to give an answer which will tend to subject
him to a penalty for an offense unless otherwise
provided by law; or
(5) Not to give an answer which will tend to degrade
his reputation, unless it be to the very fact at
 EVIDENCE
issue or to a fact from which the fact in issue
would be presumed. But a witness must answer
to the fact of his previous final conviction for an
offense.(3a, 19a)
OBLIGATIONS OF A WITNESS
GENERAL RULE: A witness cannot refuse to answer
questions material to the inquiry even if it may tend
to establish a claim against him
EXCEPTION: He may validly refuse to answer:
(1) Under the right against self-incrimination
(If it will subject him to punishment for an
offense)
(a) Available in civil, criminal and administrative
cases;
(b) May be with reference to the offense
involved in the same case where he is
charged or in another case;
(c) It may be waived however in immunity
statutes wherein the witness is granted
immunity from criminal prosecution for
offenses admitted in his testimony.
(2) Under the right against self-degradation
(If it will have a direct tendency to degrade his
character)
RIGHTS OF A WITNESS
(1) To be protected from irrelevant, improper, or
insulting questions, and from harsh or insulting
demeanor;
(2) Not to be detained longer than the interests of
justice require;
(3) Not to be examined except only as to matters
pertinent to the issue;
(4) Not to give an answer which will tend to subject
him to a penalty for an offense unless otherwise
provided by law; or
(5) Not to give an answer which will tend to degrade
his reputation, unless it be to the very fact at
issue or to a fact from which the fact in issue
would be presumed. But a witness must answer
to the fact of his previous final conviction for an
offense.
D.3. ORDER IN THE EXAMINATION OF WITNESSES
RULE 132
SEC. 4. Order in the examination of an individual
witness.— The order in which an individual witness
may be examined is as follows:
(a) Direct examination by the proponent;
(b) Cross-examination by the opponent;
(c) Re-direct examination by the proponent;
(d) Re-cross-examination by the opponent.(4)
D.3.1. DIRECT EXAMINATION
RULE 132
LA SALLIAN COMMISION ON BAR OPERATIONS
24 REMEDIAL LAW
SEC. 5. Direct examination.—Direct examination is
the examination-in-chief of a witness by the party
presenting him on the facts relevant to the issue.(5a)
D.3.2. CROSS EXAMINATION
RULE 132
SEC. 6. Cross-examination; its purpose and extent.—
Upon the termination of the direct examination, the
witness may be cross-examined by the adverse party
as to any matters stated in the direct examination, or
connected therewith, with sufficient fullness and
freedom to test his accuracy and truthfulness and
freedom from interest or bias, or the reverse, and to
elicit all important facts bearing upon the issue.(8a)
PURPOSES OF CROSS EXAMINATION
(1) To discredit the witness
(2) To discredit the testimony of the witness
(3) To clarify certain matters
(4) To elicit admissions from witnesses
Scope and Limits of Cross Examination
(1) American Rule - Restricts cross-examination to
facts which are connected with the matters that
have been stated in the direct examination of the
witness
(2) English Rule - A witness may be cross-examined,
not only upon matters testified to by him on his
direct examination, BUT ALSO on all matters
relevant to the issue
What Rule Do we Follow? – BOTH
GENERAL RULE: We follow the English Rule –
However, it does not mean that the party is making
the witness his own, as stated in Sec 5
EXCEPTION: We follow the American Rule (may only
be cross-examined on matters covered by direct
examination) when:
(1) The witness is an unwilling or hostile witness as
so declared by the court OR is an adverse party
(2) The witness is an accused who testifies as a
witness in his own behalf
Hostile Witness - One declared so by the court upon
adequate showing of his – adverse interest,
unjustified reluctance to testify or his having misled
the party into calling to the stand.
Misleading Facts (Questions which assumes facts not
on record), IF asked:
(1) On cross-examination: Objectionable for being
misleading
(2) On direct-examination: Objectionable for lack of
basis
Doctrine of Incomplete Testimony: When cross-
examination cannot be done or completed due to
causes attributable to the party who offered the
 EVIDENCE
witness, the incomplete testimony is rendered
incompetent
GENERAL RULE: Such testimony should be stricken
from the record.
EXCEPTION: However, in criminal cases when the
prosecution witness was extensively cross-examined
on the material points (essential elements of the
crime) and thereafter failed to appear and cannot be
produced despite a warrant for his arrest – striking
out is not warranted (People v. Gorospe, 1984)
When direct-examination may be stricken out for
lack of cross-examination:
Depends on who is at fault:
✓ IF it is on the party presenting the witness – it
may be expunged
✓ IF it is on the adverse party: There can be no
forfeiture of direct testimony.
D.3.3. RE-DIRECT EXAMINATION
RULE 132
SEC. 7. Re-direct examination; its purpose and
extent.—After the cross-examination of the witness
has been concluded, he may be re-examined by the
party calling him, to explain or supplement his
answers given during the cross-examination. On re-
direct examination, questions on matters not dealt
with during the cross-examination, may be allowed by
the court in its discretion.(12)
Principal Object: To prevent injustice to the witness
and the party who has called him by affording an
opportunity to the witness:
(1) To explain/amplify/reaffirm the testimony which
he has given on Cross-E
(2) To explain any apparent contradiction or
inconsistency in his statements
D.3.4. RE-CROSS EXAMINATION
RULE 132
SEC. 8. Re-cross-examination.—
Upon the conclusion of the re-direct examination, the
adverse party may re-cross-examine the witness on
matters stated in his re-direct examination, and also
on such other matters as may be allowed by the court
in its discretion.(13)
Purpose: To overcome the other party’s attempt to
rehabilitate a witness or to rebut damaging evidence
brought out on Cross-E
It is NOT a Matter of Right on Re-Cross-E for Counsel
to Touch on Matters NOT Brought on Re-Direct-E
Re-Cross-E is limited to new matters brought out on
the Re-Direct-E and such matters as may be allowed
by the court.
LA SALLIAN COMMISION ON BAR OPERATIONS
25 REMEDIAL LAW
D.3.5. RECALLING WIITNESS
RULE 132
SEC. 9. Recalling witness.—
After the examination of a witness by both sides has
been concluded, the witness cannot be recalled
without leave of the court. The court will grant or
withhold leave in its discretion, as the interests of
justice may required 14)
GENERAL RULE: After the examination of a witness
by both sides has been concluded, the witness,
CANNOT be recalled W/O leave of court
EXCEPTION: When a recall of the witness has been
expressly reserved – recall is a matter of right
D.4. LEADING AND MISLEADING QUESTIONS
RULE 132
SEC. 10. Leading and misleading questions.—A
question which suggests to the witness the answer
which the examining party desires is a leading
question. It is not allowed, except:
(a) On cross examination;
(b) On preliminary matters;
(c) When there is difficulty in getting direct and
intelligible answers from a witness who is
ignorant, or a child of tender years, or is of
feeble mind, or a deaf-mute;
(d) Of an unwilling or hostile witness; or
(e) Of a witness who is an adverse party or an
officer, director, or managing agent of a
public or private corporation or of a
partnership or association which is an
adverse party.
A misleading question is one which assumes as true a
fact not yet testified to by the witness, or contrary to
that which he has previously stated. It is not
allowed.(5a, 6a, and 8a)
Leading Question - One which suggests to the witness
the answer desired.
GENERAL RULE: It is not allowed
Ratio: It causes the witness to testify in accordance
with the suggestion rather than a genuine recollection
of events
EXCEPTIONS:
(1) On cross-examination
(2) On preliminary matters
(3) Difficulty in getting direct and intelligible
answers
(4) Unwilling or hostile witness
(5) Adverse party or an officer, director or a
corporation or partnership which is an adverse
party
Note: For Nos. 3 and 4: There is no need of a
 EVIDENCE
preliminary showing of hostility before leading
questions can be asked
Leading questions have been allowed by the SC
when the witness is: immature, aged and infirm, in
bad physical condition, uneducated, ignorant
unaccustomed to court proceedings, feeble-minded,
confused, has slow comprehension, deaf and dumb,
unable to speak or understand English. (People v.
Dela Cruz, 2002)
As a general rule, leading questions are not allowed.
However, we have held that when the witness is a
child of tender years, it is proper for the court to
allow leading questions as it is usually difficult for a
child of such age to state facts without prompting or
suggestion. Leading questions are necessary to coax
the truth out of their reluctant lips. (People v. Del
Valle, GR No. 139229, April 22, 2002)
Note: A question that merely suggests a subject w/o
suggesting an answer or a specific thing is NOT a
leading question
Misleading Question - One which assumes facts not in
evidence or w/o sufficient basis or which assumes
testimony or proof which has not been given. – It has
little probative value
Misleading question is NOT allowed
D.5. METHODS OF IMPEACHING OF ADVERSE
PARTY’S WITNESS
RULE 132
SEC. 11. Impeachment of adverse party's witness.—A
witness may be impeached by the party against whom
he was called, by contradictory evidence, by evidence
that his general reputation for truth, honesty, or
integrity is bad, or by evidence that he has made at
other times statements inconsistent with his present
testimony, but not by evidence of particular wrongful
acts, except that it may be shown by the examination
of the witness, or the record of the judgment, that he
has been convicted of an offense.(15)
A Party Can Impeach a Witness of the Adverse Party
BY:
(1) Contradictory evidence from testimony in same
case
(2) Evidence of prior inconsistent statement
(3) Evidence of bad character and
(4) Evidence of bias, interest, prejudice or
incompetence
(5) Evidence of mental, sensory derangement or
defect
(6) Evidence of conviction of an offense which
affects credibility of witness. (People v. Givera
349 SCRA 573 (2001)
D.6. HOW THE WITNESS IS IMPEACHED BY
LA SALLIAN COMMISION ON BAR OPERATIONS
26 REMEDIAL LAW
EVIDENCE OF INCONSISTENT STATEMENTS
(LAYING THE PREDICATE)
RULE 132
SEC. 13. How witness impeached by evidence of
inconsistent statements.—Before a witness can be
impeached by evidence that he has made at other
times statements inconsistent with his present
testimony, the statements must be related to him,
with the circumstances of the times and places and
the persons present, and he must be asked whether
he made such statements, and if so, allowed to
explain them. If the statements be in writing they
must be shown to the witness before any question is
put to him concerning them.(16)
Contradictory Evidence - refers to other testimony of
the same witness, or other evidence presented by him
in the same case
Prior Inconsistent Statement - refers to statements
oral or documentary, made by the witness sought to
be impeached on occasions other than trial in which
he is testifying.
Impeaching done by “laying the predicate”:
(1) By confronting him with such statements, with
the circumstances under which they were made
(2) By asking him whether he made such statements
and
(3) By giving him as chance to explain the
inconsistency
Note: Unless the witness is given the opportunity to
explain the discrepancies, the impeachment is
incomplete.
HOWEVER, such defect is deemed WAIVED if no
objection on that ground is raised when the document
involved is offered for admission
Ratio for Laying the Predicate
(1) To avoid unfair surprise to the adversary
(2) To save time (an admission will make extrinsic
proof unnecessary)
(3) To give the witness a chance to explain
D.7. EVIDENCE OF GOOD CHARACTER OF A
WITNESS
RULE 132
SEC. 14. Evidence of good character of witness.—
Evidence of the good character of a witness is not
admissible until such character has been impeached.(
17)
EVIDENCE OF GOOD CHARACTER OF
WITNESS
GENERAL RULE: evidence of good character of
witness is not admissible.
EXCEPTION: the character of the witness has been
 EVIDENCE
impeached.
Note: This must be differentiated with the rule
related to the accused introducing evidence of his
good character and the prohibition on the part of the
accused to give evidence of bad character unless as
rebuttal by the prosecution.
 (People vs Raquel, 265 SCRA 248, 1996)
IMPEACHMENT OF WITNESS BY
EVIDENCE OF WRONGFUL ACTS
GENERAL RULE: impeachment of a witness by
evidence of his particular 
wrongful acts is
disallowed.
EXCEPTION: in relation to his prior conviction of an
offense through cross-examination and or by
presenting the record of his prior conviction.
E. ADMISSIONS AND CONFESSIONS
Admission - Any statement of fact made by a party
against his interest or unfavorable to the conclusion
for which he contends or is inconsistent with the facts
alleged by him.
Express Admissions - are those made in definite,
certain and unequivocal language.
Implied Admissions - are those which may be inferred
from the acts, declarations or omission of a party.
Therefore, an admission may be implied from
conduct, statement of silence of a party.
E.1. RES INTER ALIOS ACTA RULE
“Res Inter Alios Acta Alteri Noceree Non Debet”
Things done between strangers ought not to injure
those who are not parties to it.
Consists of Two Parts:
(1) 1st Part: Sec 28, rule 130 (Admission by a Third
Party)
(2) 2nd Part: Sec 34, rule 130 (Similar Acts as
Evidence)
EXCEPTION: to the Rule: When the 3rd person is a
(1) A partner, agent, joint owner, joint debtor, or
has a joint interest with the party (Sec. 29, Rule
130)
(2) A co-conspirator (Sec. 30, Rule 130); or a
(3) A privy of the party(Sec. 31, Rule 130)
The res inter alios rule ordains that the rights of a
party cannot be prejudiced by an act, declaration, or
omission of another. An extrajudicial confession is
binding only upon the confessant and is not
admissible against his co-accused. The reason for the
rule is that, on a principle of good faith and mutual
convenience, a man’s own acts are binding upon
himself, and are evidence against him. So are his
LA SALLIAN COMMISION ON BAR OPERATIONS
27 REMEDIAL LAW
conduct and declarations. Yet it would not only be
rightly inconvenient, but also manifestly unjust, that
a man should be bound by the acts of mere
unauthorized strangers; and if a party ought not to be
bound by the acts of strangers, neither ought their
acts or conduct be used as evidence against him.
E.2. ADMISSION BY A PARTY
RULE 130
Sec. 26 . Admission of a party. — The act, declaration
or omission of a party as to a relevant fact may be
given in evidence against him. (22)
Requisites for Admissions to be Admissible
(1) They must involve matters of fact and not of law;
(2) They must be categorical and definite;
(3) They must be knowingly and voluntarily made;
(4) They must be adverse to the admitter’s interests,
otherwise it would be self-serving and
inadmissible.
OTHER FORMS OF ADMISSIONS:
Verbal or written, express or tacit, judicial or
extrajudicial
(1) Judicial: One made in connection w/ a judicial
proceedings (conclusive – does not require proof)
(2) Extrajudicial: Any other admissions (Sec 26 to 32)
(Rebuttable – requires proof)
E.3. ADMISSION BY A THIRD PARTY
RULE 130
Sec. 28 . Admission by third party. — The rights of a
party cannot be prejudiced by an act, declaration, or
omission of another, except as hereinafter provided.
(25a)
EXCEPTION: to the Rule: When the 3rd person is a
(1) A partner, agent, joint owner, joint debtor, or
has a joint interest with the party (Sec. 29, Rule
130)
(2) A co-conspirator (Sec. 30, Rule 130); or a
(3) A privy of the party(Sec. 31, Rule 130)
Basis of the GENERAL RULE:
A party is not bound by any agreement to which he
has no knowledge and to which he has not given his
consent. His rights cannot be prejudiced by the
declaration, act or omission of another exception by
virtue of a particular relation between them.
Basis of the EXCEPTION:
A third party may be so united in interest with the
party-opponent that the other person’s admissions
may be receivable against the party himself. The
term “privy” is the orthodox catchword for the
relation.
 EVIDENCE
E.4. ADMISSION BY A CO-PARTNER OR AGENT
RULE 130
Sec. 29 . Admission by co-partner or agent. — The act
or declaration of a partner or agent of the party
within the scope of his authority and during the
existence of the partnership or agency, may be given
in evidence against such party after the partnership
or agency is shown by evidence other than such act or
declaration. The same rule applies to the act or
declaration of a joint owner, joint debtor, or other
person jointly interested with the party. (26a)
Requisites for This Exception To Apply:
(1) That the partnership, agency, or joint interest is
established by evidence other than the act or
declaration – Partnership relation must be shown;
(2) The act or declaration is within the scope of the
partnership, agency or joint interest With regard
to a non-partnership affair: The fact that each
partner has individually made a substantially
similar admission does not render the aggregate
admission competent against the firm.
(3) Such act or declaration must have been made
during the existence of the partnership, agency
or joint interest.
Statements made after the partnership has been
dissolved do not fall within the exception.
BUT if they are made in connection with the winding
up of the partnership – such admission is STILL
admissible.
E.5. ADMISSION BY A CONSPIRATOR
RULE 130
Sec. 30 . Admission by conspirator. — The act or
declaration of a conspirator relating to the conspiracy
and during its existence, may be given in evidence
against the co-conspirator after the conspiracy is
shown by evidence other than such act of declaration.
(27)
ADMISSION BY A CONSPIRATOR
Application of the Requirement that the Conspiracy
exists must primarily be proved by Evidence other
than the Conspirator’s Admission
Applies ONLY to extrajudicial acts or statements
NOT to judicial admission as to a testimony given on
the witness stand at the trial where the party
adversely effected has the opportunity to cross
examine the declarant
An Admission by a Conspirator is Admissible Against
his Co-conspirator
(1) Such conspiracy is shown by evidence aliunde -
Conspiracy must be established by prima facie
LA SALLIAN COMMISION ON BAR OPERATIONS
28 REMEDIAL LAW
proof in the judgment of the court;
(2) The admission was made during the existence of
the conspiracy - After the termination of a
conspiracy, the statements of one conspirator
may not be accepted as evidence against any of
the other conspirators;
(3) The admission related to the conspiracy itself.
Should relate to the common object.
Existence of the Conspiracy May be Inferred:
(1) From the acts of the accused
(2) From the confessions of the accused
(3) Or by prima facie proof thereof
Note: If there is no independent evidence of the
conspiracy – the extrajudicial confession CANNOT be
used against his co-accused (res inter alios rule
applies to both EXJ and J admissions)
Here, there is no need to produce direct evidence -
independent circumstantial evidence will suffice.
Quantum of Evidence to Prove Conspiracy
Clear and convincing evidence
Rules on Extrajudicial Admissions Made by a
Conspirator AFTER the conspiracy had terminated and
BEFORE the trial
GENERAL RULE: NOT admissible
EXCEPTION: Admissible against the co-conspirator IF:
(1) Made in the presence of the co-conspirator who
expressly or impliedly agreed therein – as there is
tacit admission under Sec 32
(2) Where the facts stated in said admission are
confirmed in the individual extrajudicial
confessions made by the co-conspirators after
their apprehension (interlocking confessions)
(3) As a circumstance to determine the credibility of
a witness
(4) As circumstantial evidence to show the
probability of the co-conspirator’s participation
in the offense.
In order that the Extrajudicial statements of a co-
accused may be taken into consideration in judging
the testimony of a witness it is necessary that:
(1) The statements are made by several accused,
(2) The same are in all material respects identical;
and,
(3) There could have been no collusion among said
co-accused in making such statements.
E.6. ADMISSION BY PRIVIES
RULE 130
Sec. 31 . Admission by privies. — Where one derives
title to property from another, the act, declaration,
or omission of the latter, while holding the title, in
relation to the property, is evidence against the
former. (28)
 EVIDENCE
Admission by privies
Privity - Mutual succession of relationship to the same
rights of property.
Privies - those who have mutual or successive
relationship to the same right of property or subject
matter
To be Admissible, The Following Requisites Must
Concur:
(1) There must be a relation of privity between the
party and the declarant;
(2) The admission was made by the declarant, as
predecessor in interest, while holding the title to
the property;
(3) The admission is in relation to said property.
The privity in estate may arise by succession, by acts
mortis causa or by acts inter vivos.
E.7. ADMISSION BY SILENCE
RULE 130
Sec. 32 . Admission by silence. — An act or
declaration made in the presence and within the
hearing or observation of a party who does or says
nothing when the act or declaration is such as
naturally to call for action or comment if not
true, and when proper and possible for him to do
so, may be given in evidence against him. (23a)
To be Admissible the following Requisites Must
Concur:
(1) He must have heard or observed the act or
declaration of the other person;
(2) He must have had the opportunity to deny it
(3) He must have understood the statement;
(4) He must have an interest to object, such that he
would naturally have done so, as if the statement
was not true;
(5) The facts are within his knowledge;
(6) The fact admitted or the inference to be drawn
from his silence is material to the issue.
(People v. Pabrua, GR No. 86220, April 20, 1990)
The rule on admission by silence applies:
(a) Where a person was surprised in the act; or,
(b) Even if he is already in the custody of the
police.
Note: Applies to both civil and criminal cases.
E.8. CONFESSIONS
RULE 130
Sec. 33 . Confession. — The declaration of an accused
acknowledging his guilt of the offense charged, or of
any offense necessarily included therein, may be
given in evidence against him. (29a)
Confession - A categorical acknowledgement of guilt
made by an accused in a criminal case, w/o any
exculpatory statement or explanation.
LA SALLIAN COMMISION ON BAR OPERATIONS
29 REMEDIAL LAW
IF the accused admits the act BUT alleges a
justification – it is merely an admission
Confession of Judgment in Civil Cases = Admission of
Liability
Forms of Confession:
(1) Oral and under oath
(2) In writing (need not be under oath)
Note: Sec 33 refers to EX-J Confessions
Types of Confessions
(1) Judicial Confession:
One made before a court in which the case is
pending and in the course of legal proceedings
therein
✓ By itself, can sustain conviction, even for a
capital offense
✓ But for Capital Offenses: there must be
evidence presented other than the plea of
guilty, also proof that such plea was made
voluntarily and w/ full comprehension
(2) Extrajudicial (EX-J) Confession:
One made in any other place or occasion
General Rule: Cannot sustain a conviction
Exception: Unless corroborated by evidence of
the corpus delicti
Requirements for the Admissibility of Extrajudicial
Confessions
(1) The confession must involve an express and
categorical acknowledgment of guilt;
(2) The facts admitted must be constitutive of a
criminal offense;
(3) The confession must have been given voluntarily;
(4) the confession must have been intelligently
made, the accused realizing the importance or
legal significance of this act;
(5) There must have been no violation of Section 12,
Art. III of the 1987 Constitution. (Rights in
custodial investigation)
E.9. SIMILAR ACTS AS EVIDENCE
RULE 130
Sec. 34 . Similar acts as evidence. — Evidence that
one did or did not do a certain thing at one time is
not admissible to prove that he did or did not do the
same or similar thing at another time; but it may be
received to prove a specific intent or knowledge;
identity, plan, system, scheme, habit, custom or
usage, and the like. (48a)
GENERAL RULE: Evidence that one did or did not do
a certain thing at one time is not admissible to prove
that he did or did not do the same or similar thing at
another time
EXCEPTION: Where the evidence or similar acts may
prove:
(1) A specific intent or knowledge;
(2) Identity;
 EVIDENCE
(3) A plan, system or scheme;
(4) A specific habit; or
(5) Established customs, usages and the like
Basis: Evidence must be confined to the point in issue
in the case on trial. Evidence of collateral offenses
must not be received as substantive evidence of the
offense on trial.
Purpose: To compel the defendant to meet charges
of which the indictment gives him no information,
confuses him in his defense, raises a variety of issues,
and thus diverts the attention of the court from the
charge immediately before it.
Examples of the Exceptions:
(1) Evidence of another crime is admissible in a
prosecution for robbery:
✓ When it has the tendency to identify the
accused or show his presence at the scene of
the crime
 NOT where the evidence is to prove a
commission of another crime wholly
independent of that which is on trial.
(2) Previous acts of negligence, is admissible to show
knowledge or intent.
F. HEARSAY RULE
General Rule: A witness can testify only to those facts
which he knows of his personal knowledge, derived
from his own personal perception.
F.1. MEANING OF HEARSAY
Evidence not proceeding from personal knowledge of
the witness, but from the mere repetition of what he
has heard others say. (Black’s Law Dictionary, 5th Ed.,
p. 649)
F.2. REASON FOR EXCLUSION OF HEARSAY
EVIDENCE
Due to the trustworthiness and reliability of hearsay
evidence. Because such evidence:
(1) was not given under oath or solemn affirmation;
and
(2) was not subject to cross-examination by opposing
counsel to test the perception, memory, veracity
and articulateness of out-of- court declarant or
actor upon whose reliability on which the worth
of the out-of-court testimony depends. 
 therefore entitled to the presumption of truthfulness
F.3. EXCEPTIONS TO THE HEARSAY RULE
F.3.1. DYING DECLARATION
RULE 130
Sec. 37 . Dying declaration. — The declaration of a
dying person, made under the consciousness of an
impending death, may be received in any case
wherein his death is the subject of inquiry, as
evidence of the cause and surrounding circumstances
LA SALLIAN COMMISION ON BAR OPERATIONS
30 REMEDIAL LAW
of such death. (31a)
Dying Declaration (DD) - Statements made by a
person after the mortal wound has been inflicted
under the belief that the death is certain, stating the
fact concerning the cause of and the circumstances
surrounding the attack.
Also known as “Ante Mortem Statements” or
“Statement in Articulo Mortis”
Requisites for DDs to be Admissible
(1) That the death is imminent and the declarant is
conscious of such fact;
(2) That the declaration refers to the cause and the
surrounding circumstances of such death;
(3) That the declaration refers to the facts which the
victim is competent to testify to;
(4) That the declaration is offered in a case wherein
the declarant’s death is subject of the inquiry
(the victim necessarily must have died);
(5) That the statement must be complete in itself.
In order for a dying declaration to be held admissible,
four requisites must concur: first, the declaration
must concern the cause and surrounding
circumstances of the declarant's death; second, at
the time the declaration was made, the declarant
must be under the consciousness of an impending
death; third, the declarant is competent as a witness;
and fourth, the declaration must be offered in a
criminal case for homicide, murder, or parricide, in
which the declarant is the victim.(People v Serenas &
Labad, GR No. 188124, June 29, 2010)
A dying declaration to be admissible must be
complete in itself. To be complete in itself does not
mean that the declarant must recite everything that
constituted the res gestae of the subject of his
statement, but that his statement of any given fact
should be a full expression of all that he intended to
say as conveying his meaning in respect of such fact.
The reason upon which incomplete declarations are
generally excluded, or if admitted, accorded little or
no weight, is that since the declarant was prevented
(by death or other circumstance) from saying all that
he wished to say, what he did say might have been
qualified by the statements which he was prevented
from making. That incomplete declaration is not
which constitutes the basis upon which dying
declarations are received. In this case, the dying
declaration was not complete.
(People v De Joya, 203 SCRA 343)
F.3.2. DECLARATION AGAINST
INTEREST
RULE 130
Sec. 38 . Declaration against interest. — The
 EVIDENCE 31 REMEDIAL LAW

declaration made by a person deceased, or unable to Self- Serving Declaration- Statements favorable to or
testify, against the interest of the declarant, if the intended to advance the interests of the declarant
fact is asserted in the declaration was at the time it ✓ It is inadmissible as being hearsay if the
was made so far contrary to declarant's own interest, delcarant is unavailable as a witness
that a reasonable man in his position would not have ✓ Opposite of DAI
made the declaration unless he believed it to be true,
may be received in evidence against himself or his The general rule is stated to be that the declaration
successors in interest and against third persons. (32a) of a person other than accused confessing or tending
to show that he committed the crime are not
Declaration Against Interest competent for accused on account of the hearsay
DECLARATIONS Against ADMISSIONS Against doctrine. However, if a man deliberately
Interest Interest acknowledged himself to be the perpetrator of a
Made by a person who is Made by a party to a crime and exonerated the person charged with the
neither a party nor in litigation or by one in crime, and there was other evidence indicative of the
privity with a party to the privity with or identified truthfulness of the statement, the accused man
suite. in legal interest with should not be permitted to go to prison or to the
such party electric chair to expiate a crime he never
Secondary Evidence Primary Evidence committed.(People v. Toledo, GR No. L-28655, August
Exception to the Hearsay Covered by the Hearsay 6, 1928)
Rule Rule
Admissible ONLY when Admissible w/n the
the declarant is declarant is available as F.3.3. ACT OR DECLARATION ABOUT
UNavailable as a witness a witness PEDIGREE
Must be made ante litem May be made at any time RULE 130
motam (before the before/during the trial
Sec. 39 . Act or declaration about pedigree. — The
controversy)
act or declaration of a person deceased, or unable to
May be admitted against Used ONLY against the
testify, in respect to the pedigree of another person
himself/successor in party admitting.
related to him by birth or marriage, may be received
interest and against 3rd in evidence where it occurred before the controversy,
parties and the relationship between the two persons is
shown by evidence other than such act or declaration.
Requisites in Order for a Statement to be The word "pedigree" includes relationship, family
Admissible as a DAI genealogy, birth, marriage, death, the dates when
(1) the declarant must not be available to testify; and the places where these fast occurred, and the
(2) the declaration must concern a fact cognizable names of the relatives. It embraces also facts of
by the declarant; and family history intimately connected with pedigree.
(3) the circumstances must render it improbable that (33a)
a motive to falsify existed.
(Fuentes v. CA, GR No. 111692, February 9, 1996)
Requisites in Order that Pedigree May be Proved by
Acts or Declarations of Relatives
Reasons for such Admission
(a) The declarant is dead or unable to testify.
(1) Necessity
(b) The pedigree must be in issue.
such declarations are the only mode of proof
(c) The declarant must be a relative of the person
available
whose pedigree is in issue.
(2) Trustworthiness
(d) The declaration must be made before the
persons do not make statements that are
controversy arose.
disadvantageous to themselves without
(e) The relationship between the declarant and the
substantial reason to believe that the statements
person whose pedigree is in question must be
are true. Self-interest induces men to be
shown by evidence other than such declaration
cautious in saying anything against themselves.
(Mendoza v. CA, Tunacao, GR No. 86302, September
24, 1991)
Interest covered:
(1) Proprietary interest
Pedigree May be Established or Proved By:
(2) Penal interest
(a) The act or declaration of a relative (sec 39)
(3) Pecuniary interest
(b) The reputation or tradition existing in his family
(sec 40)
Note: It is essential that at the time of the
(c) Entries in Family Bibles (sec 40)
statement, the declarant’s interest affected is
(d) With respect to marriage, by common reputation
actual/real/apparent not merely
in the community (Sec 41)
contingent/future/conditional

LA SALLIAN COMMISION ON BAR OPERATIONS

 EVIDENCE 32 REMEDIAL LAW

Note: The relationship must preliminarily be proved of the declarant’s family

by direct or circumstantial evidence.

No specific degree of relationship is required Relation bet the The witness himself is
declarant and the person the one to whom the
BUT the weight to which such act or declaration is subject of inquiry must be fact relates. No need to
entitled may be affected by the degree of established by establish relationship by
relationship independent evidence independent evidence.

Note: Reputation between the declarant and the
person subject of inquiry must be legitimate unless
the issue is the legitimacy itself.
F.3.4. FAMILY REPUTATION OR
TRADITION REGARDING PEDIGREE
RULE 130
Sec. 40 . Family reputation or tradition regarding
pedigree. — The reputation or tradition existing in a
family previous to the controversy, in respect to the
pedigree of any one of its members, may be received
in evidence if the witness testifying thereon be also a
member of the family, either by consanguinity or
affinity. Entries in family bibles or other family books
or charts, engravings on rings, family portraits and
the like, may be received as evidence of pedigree.
(34a)
Requisites
(1) that there is a controversy in respect to the
pedigree of any of the members of a family;
(2) that the reputation or tradition of the pedigree
existed previous to the controversy; and
(3) that the witness testifying to the reputation or
tradition regarding the pedigree of the person
must be a member of the family of said person.
(People v. Opiana, GR No. 134101, September 5,
2001)
The word "pedigree" under Section 39 of the same
Rule includes relationship, family genealogy, birth,
marriage, death, the dates when and places where
these facts occurred and the names of relatives.(Id.)
Note: A statement as to one’s date of birth and age
as learned from parents or relatives is an ante litem
motam declaration of family tradition
F.3.5. COMMON REPUTATION
RULE 130
Sec. 41 . Common reputation. — Common reputation
existing previous to the controversy, respecting facts
of public or general interest more than thirty years
old, or respecting marriage or moral character, may
be given in evidence. Monuments and inscriptions in
public places may be received as evidence of common
reputation. (35)
Common Reputation - The definite opinion of the
community in which the fact to be proved is known or
exists. It means the general or substantially
undivided reputation, as distinguished from a partial
or qualified one, although it need not be unanimous.
REQUISITES FOR COMMON REPUTATION
(1) The subject of inquiry must be facts of public or
general interest more than 30 years old,
respecting marriage or moral character;
(2) The evidence must refer to facts ante litem
motam;
(3) The facts may be established by:
(a) Testimonial evidence of competent witness;
(b) Monuments and inscription in public places;
(c) Documents containing statements of
reputation.
Common Reputation or General Reputation is
Admissible to Prove
(1) Facts of public interest more than 30 years old
(2) Facts of general interest more that 30 years old
(3) Marriage
(4) Moral Character
Note: Common reputation must have existed ante
litem motam

Such statement prevails over a mere opinion of a trial Public Interest = Those of National Interest
judge BUT cannot prevail over a secondary statement General Interest = Those affecting inhabitants of a
of the father particular region or community
Character = Inherent qualities of a person
Section 39 Section 40 Reputation = Opinion of him by others (Should be
Act or declaration against Family reputation or existing in his place of residence, but may also exist
pedigree tradition regarding in a place where he is known best)
pedigree Note: Here, character is permitted to be established
by his common reputation
Witness need not be a Witness is a member of
member of the family the family
Evidence of Negative Good Repute: Where the
Testimony is about what Testimony is about
foundation proof shows that the witness was in such
declarant, who is dead or family reputation or
position that he would have heard reports derogatory
unable to testify, said tradition covering
to one’s character, the reputation testimony may be
concerning the pedigree matters of pedigree.
predicated on the absence of reports of bad

LA SALLIAN COMMISION ON BAR OPERATIONS

 EVIDENCE 33 REMEDIAL LAW

reputation or on the fact that the witness heard connection with a startling occurrence relating to
nothing against the person. that fact and in effect forming part thereof
(2) Verbal Acts: Statements accompanying an
Family Tradition equivocal act, on the theory that they are the
Testimony made by a witness regarding a declaration verbal parts of the act to be explained.
made by someone deceased, when both the witness
and the declarant are members of the same family, is Requisites for Res Gestae
admissible as evidence of family tradition. Requisites for Res Gestae
No 1: Spontaneous
No 2: Verbal Acts
Statements
Common Reputation: (1) The principal act, (1) The res gestae or
Evidence may be given upon trial of monuments and the res gestae, be a principal act or to be
inscriptions in public places as evidence of common startling occurrence; characterized must
reputation; and entries in family Bibles or other (2) The statements be equivocal;
family books or charts; engravings on rings, family were made before (2) Such act must be
portraits and the like, as evidence of pedigree. the delcarant had material to the issue
the opportunity to (3) The statements must
contrive accompany the
F.3.6. PART OF THE RES GESTAE (3) The statements must equivocal act.
refer to the (4) The statements give
RULE 130
occurrence in a legal significance
Sec. 42 . Part of res gestae. — Statements made by a question and its to the equivocal act
person while a starting occurrence is taking place or attending
immediately prior or subsequent thereto with respect circumstances
to the circumstances thereof, may be given in (4) The statement must
evidence as part of res gestae. So, also, statements be spontaneous.
accompanying an equivocal act material to the issue,
The res gestae is the The res gestae is the
and giving it a legal significance, may be received as
startling occurrence equivocal act.
part of the res gestae. (36a)
Statements may be made Verbal act must be
prior, during or contemporaneous with or
Res Gestae which means “things done”,
immediately after the accompany the equivocal
startling occurrence. act.
Res gestae refers to statements made by the
participants or the victims of, or the spectators to, a
crime immediately before, during, or after its Requisites for Admissibility of Res Gestae, The
commission. These statements are a spontaneous statement must
(1) Be Spontaneous;
reaction or utterance inspired by the excitement of
(2) Made while a startling occurrence is taking place
the occasion, without any opportunity for the
declarant to fabricate a false statement. An or immediately prior or subsequent;
(3) Relates to the circumstances of the startling
important consideration is whether there intervened,
between the occurrence and the statement, any occurrence; and
(4) Must be involuntary and simultaneously wrung
circumstance calculated to divert the mind and thus
restore the mental balance of the declarant; and from the witness by the impact of the occurrence
afford an opportunity for deliberation. (People v.
Calunsag, GR No. 208749, November 26, 2014) Reasons for Admission
(1) Necessity - Natural and spontaneous utterances
Factors to consider in determining whether are more convincing than the testimony of a
statements offered as part of res gestae have been person on the stand.
made spontaneously (2) Trustworthiness - The statement is made
(1) the time that has lapsed between the occurrence indistinctively. The facts speaking thru the party
of the act or transaction and the making of the and not the party speaking thru the facts.
statement;
(2) the place where the statement is made; Res Gestae in Dying Declarations
(3) the condition of the declarant when the connection with a
utterance is given; homicidal act
(4) the presence or absence of intervening events May be made by the Can be made only by the
between the occurrence and the statement killer himself after or victim.
relative thereto; and during the killing OR
(5) the nature and the circumstances of the that of a 3rd person.
statement itself.(Id.) May precede or be made Made only after the
after the homicidal homicidal attack has been
TYPES: attack was committed. committed.
(1) Spontaneous statements: Statements in

LA SALLIAN COMMISION ON BAR OPERATIONS

 EVIDENCE
Justification in the Trustworthiness based
spontaneity of the upon in its being given in
statement. awareness of impending
death.
Note: If both elements for res gestae and dying
declarations are present – they may be admitted as
both.
When Must the Statement or Act be Made:
General Rule: While the declarant was under the
immediate influence of the startling occurrence.
Hence, done immediately prior, during or subsequent
to the events.
Exception:
✓ If the declarant was unconscious – statements
regarding the event will still be admissible
✓ If the declarant did not have the opportunity to
concoct or contrive a story – it is still admissible
even if statement was made after hours
Statements or Outcries as Part of Res Gestae are
Admissible:
(1) To establish the identity of the assailant
(2) To prove the complicity of another person in the
crime
(3) To establish an admission of liability on the part
of the accused
F.3.7. ENTRIES IN THE COURSE OF
BUSINESS
RULE 130
Sec. 43 . Entries in the course of business. — Entries
made at, or near the time of transactions to which
they refer, by a person deceased, or unable to
testify, who was in a position to know the facts
therein stated, may be received as prima
facie evidence, if such person made the entries in his
professional capacity or in the performance of duty
and in the ordinary or regular course of business or
duty. (37a)
Shop Book Rule Requisites
(1) The person who made the entry must be dead or
unable to testify.
(2) The entries were made at or near the time of the
transaction to which they refer;
(3) The entrant was in a position to know the facts
stated in the entries;
(4) The entries were made in his professional
capacity or in the performance of a duty whether
legal, contractual, moral or religious; and
(5) The entries were made in the ordinary or regular
course of business or duty.
Rules for Admissibility of Business Entries
(1) If the Entrant is Available as a Witness – the
entries will be INADMISSIBLE as an exception to
the hearsay rule.
✓ They may be used as a memo to refresh his
LA SALLIAN COMMISION ON BAR OPERATIONS
34 REMEDIAL LAW
memory while testifying in the transaction
(2) There is no necessity to bring into court all the
clerks or employees who individually made the
entries.
(3) It is sufficient that the person who supervises the
work of the employees testify:
✓ That the account was prepared under his
supervision.
✓ That the entries were entered in the
ordinary course of business.
(4) There is no precise moment required when the
entries should be made – it is sufficient if it is
made w/in a reasonable time while the memory
of the facts is unimpaired.
Probative Value: Prima Facie of the facts stated
therein
F.3.8. ENTRIES IN OFFICIAL
RECORDS
RULE 130
Sec. 44 . Entries in official records. — Entries in
official records made in the performance of his duty
by a public officer of the Philippines, or by a person
in the performance of a duty specially enjoined by
law, are prima facie evidence of the facts therein
stated. (38)
Requisites for Admissibility of Official Records
(1) Entries were made by: (i) a public officer in the
performance of his duties; or (ii) by a person in
the performance of a duty specially enjoined by
law;
(2) The entrant had personal knowledge of the facts
stated by him or such facts were acquired by him
from reports made by persons under a legal duty
to submit the same; and
(3) Such entries were duly entered in a regular
manner in the official records.
(Alvarez v. PICOP Resources, G.R. No. 162243, 3
December 2009).
Reasons for Admission
(1) Necessity
Practical impossibility of requiring the official’s
attendance as a witness to testify to the
innumerable transactions occurring in the course
of his duty.
(2) Trustworthiness
there is a presumption of regularity in the
performance of official duty.
Examples of Official Records:
• A register, a cash book, or an official return or
certificate,
• motor vehicle accident report (if made in the
performance of the officer’s duties, at about the
time of the accident, based on information given
as personal knowledge)
• Sheriff’s return (statement in the performance of
 EVIDENCE 35 REMEDIAL LAW

a duty especially enjoined by law) – no need for Entries in official records, as in the case of a police
the sheriff to testify blotter, are only prima facie evidence of the facts
therein stated. They are not conclusive. The entry in
Entries in the Course of Entries in Official Records the police blotter is not necessarily entitled to full
Business (sec 43) (Sec 44) credit for it could be incomplete and inaccurate,
Entries are made by a No such requirement sometimes from either partial suggestions or for want
person who is dead or of suggestions or inquiries, without the aid of which
unable to testify the witness may be unable to recall the connected
Needs authentication No need collateral circumstances necessary for the correction
Best evidence rule Exception to the best of the first suggestion of his memory and for his
applies evidence rule accurate recollection of all that pertain to the
subject. It is understandable that the testimony
Entries are made The entrant is a public
during the trial would be more lengthy and detailed
pursuant to a duty, officer, or if a private
than the matters stated in the police blotter.(People
either legal, contractual, individual, must have
v. Ortiz, GR No. 107735, February 1, 1996)
moral or religious acted pursuant to a legal
duty
F.3.9. COMMERCIAL LISTS
Note: The entrant must have been competent with RULE 130
respect to the facts stated in his entries. Sec. 45 . Commercial lists and the like. — Evidence of
statements of matters of interest to persons engaged
Entries made by a priest in the register of the facts of in an occupation contained in a list, register,
baptism are NOT admissible to prove the date of birth periodical, or other published compilation is
or its relation to persons admissible as tending to prove the truth of any
relevant matter so stated if that compilation is
A priest is not competent to testify to the truth of published for use by persons engaged in that
these facts. occupation and is generally used and relied upon by
them therein. (39)
BUT church registries are ADMISSIBLE as evidence of
the facts with respect to marriage solemnized by the Requisites for Admissibility
priest (BUT needs to be authenticated) (1) it is a statement of matters of interest to persons
engaged in an occupation;
If the certificate is transmitted to a public officer – it (2) such statement is contained in a list, register,
is admissible w/o a need for prior authentication. periodical or other published compilation;
(3) said compilation is published for the use of
Entries in Official Records May be Proved: See Sec persons engaged in that occupation, and
24 and 25 Rule 132 (4) it is generally used and relied upon by persons in
the same occupation.
Probative Value: prima facie of the facts stated (PNOC Shipping and Transport Corp. v. CA, GR No.
therein 107518, October 8, 1998)

The rule provides that entries in official records made
in the performance of the duty of a public officer of
the Philippines, or by a person in the performance of
a duty specially enjoined by law, are prima facie
evidence of the facts therein stated. The necessity of
this rule consists in the inconvenience and difficulty
of requiring the official's attendance as a witness to
testify to the innumerable transactions in the course
of his duty. The document's trustworthiness consists
in the presumption of regularity of performance of
official duty. (Dimaguila v. Monteiro, GR No. 201011,
January 27, 2014)
The written entries in the clinical case are prima
facie evidence of the facts therein stated, the said
entries having been made in official records by a
public officer of the Philippines in the performance of
his duty especially enjoined by law, which is that of a
physician in a government hospital. (People v.
Leones, 117 SCR 382)
Reasons for Admission:
(1) Necessity - Because of the unusual accessibility
of the persons responsible for the compilation of
matters contained in a list, register, periodical or
other published compilation and tremendous
inconvenience it would cause to the court if it
would issue summons to these numerous
individuals.
(2) Trustworthiness - They have no motive to
deceive and they further realize that unless the
list, register, periodical or other published
compilation are prepared with care and
accuracy, their work will have no commercial and
probative value.
Ex. Mortality tables, annuity tables
F.3.10. LEARNED TREATIES
RULE 130
Sec. 46 . Learned treatises. — A published treatise,

LA SALLIAN COMMISION ON BAR OPERATIONS

 EVIDENCE
periodical or pamphlet on a subject of history, law,
science, or art is admissible as tending to prove the
truth of a matter stated therein if the court takes
judicial notice, or a witness expert in the subject
testifies, that the writer of the statement in the
treatise, periodical or pamphlet is recognized in his
profession or calling as expert in the subject. (40a)
Requisites for Admissibility
(1) That the court takes judicial notice thereof; or
(2) The same are testified by a witness expert on the
subject
Reasons for admission
(1) Necessity - Even if such person is legally
procurable, the expense is frequently
disproportionate.
(2) Trustworthiness - Learned writers have no motive
to misrepresent. He is aware that his work will
be carefully scrutinized by the learned members
of his profession and that he may be subject to
criticisms and ultimately rejected as an authority
of the subject matter if his conclusions are found
to be invalid
F.3.11. TESTIMONY OR DEPOSITION
AT A FORMER TRIAL
RULE 130
Sec. 47 . Testimony or deposition at a former
proceeding. — The testimony or deposition of a
witness deceased or unable to testify, given in a
former case or proceeding, judicial or administrative,
involving the same parties and subject matter, may
be given in evidence against the adverse party who
had the opportunity to cross-examine him. (41a)
Requisites for Admissibility
(1) The testimony or deposition of a witness
deceased or otherwise unable to testify;’
(2) The testimony was given in a former case or
proceeding, judicial or administrative;
(3) Involving the same parties;
(4) Relating to the same matter;
(5) The adverse party having had the opportunity to
cross-examine him
(Republic v. Sandiganbayan, et al., GR No. 152375,
December 16, 2011)
INABILITY TO TESTIFY
Inability proceeding from a grave cause, almost
amounting to death (ex. Losing one’s power of
speech)
Subsequent failure or refusal to appear at the second
trial, or hostility since testifying at the first trial does
NOT amount to such inability
Actions may be Essentially Different
Testimony given in a civil case is admissible in a
subsequent criminal case PROVIDED the above
requisites are met.
LA SALLIAN COMMISION ON BAR OPERATIONS
36 REMEDIAL LAW
Reasons for admission
(1) Necessity - Former could no longer testify
(2) Trustworthiness - Since such had been given in a
former action under oath, where witness was or
might have been cross examined
The reasons for the admissibility of testimony or
deposition taken at a former trial or proceeding are
the necessity for the testimony and its
trustworthiness. However, before the former
testimony or deposition can be introduced in
evidence, the proponent must first lay the proper
predicate therefor. (Id.)
Rule on Admissibility of Prior Judgment (Not
testimony)
(1) A judgment in a criminal proceeding cannot be
read in evidence in a civil action against a person
not a party thereto to establish any fact therein
(2) The mater is res inter alios and cannot invoked
as res judicata
(3) It may only be admitted in a civil case by way of
inducement or to show a collateral fact relevant
to the issue in the civil action
(4) It may not be admitted to prove the plaintiff’s
action or the defendant’s defense – it is not
binding upon the parties in the civil action
Ratio: Parties are not the same and different rules of
evidence are applicable to each
HOWEVER, in Miranda v. Malate: Judgment of
conviction in the absence of collusion between the
accused and the offended party is binding and
conclusive to a person subsidiarily liable w/ regard to
his liability and to the amount thereof.
G. OPINION RULE
RULE 130
Sec. 48 . General rule. — The opinion of witness is not
admissible, except as indicated in the following
sections. (42)
Opinion - An inference or conclusion drawn from
facts observed.
GENERAL RULE: Witnesses must give the facts. Their
opinion is INADMISSIBLE
EXCEPTIONS: Opinion of the Witness is Admissible
(Sec 49 &50)
(1) On a matter requiring SPECIAL knowledge, skill,
experience or training which he is shown to
possess, that is when he is an expert (Sec 49);
(2) Regarding the identity or the handwriting of a
person, when he has knowledge of the person or
handwriting, whether he is an ordinary or expert
witness (Sec 50 a & b)
(3) On the mental sanity of a person, if the witness is
sufficiently acquainted with the former or if the
 EVIDENCE
latter is an expert witness (Sec 50c)
(4) On the emotion, behavior, condition, or
appearance of a person which he has observed;
and (Sec 50d)
(5) On ordinary matters known to all men of common
perception, such as the value of ordinary
household articles (Galian v. State Assurance
Co., Ltd.)
Reason for the Rule: It is for the court to form an
opinion concerning the facts in proof of which
evidence is offered. Witnesses must testify to facts
w/in their knowledge and not their opinions.
G.1. OPINION OF EXPERT WITNESS
RULE 130
Sec. 49 . Opinion of expert witness. — The opinion of
a witness on a matter requiring special knowledge,
skill, experience or training which he shown to
posses, may be received in evidence. (43a)
Expert Witness - one who belongs to the profession
or calling to which the subject matter of the inquiry
relates and who possesses special knowledge on
questions on which he proposes to express an
opinion.(People v. Abriol, GR No. 123137, October 17,
2001)
Test: Whether the opinion called for will aid the fact
finder in resolving an issue
Degree of Skill or Knowledge Required of an Expert
Witness
There is no definite standard of determining the
degree of skill or knowledge that a witness must
possess in order to testify as an expert.
It is sufficient that the following factors are present:
(1) Training and education
(2) Particular, first hand familiarity with the facts of
the case
(3) Presentation of authorities or standards upon
which his opinion is based. (Id.)
Requisites for Admissibility of Expert Evidence -
only if:
(1) The matter to be testified to is one that requires
expertise, and
(2) The witness had been qualified as an expert
Value of an Expert Witness:
It is NOT conclusive BUT purely advisory. The courts
are not bound by the expert’s findings.
Rules on Expert Testimony
(1) Courts must consider all the circumstances of the
case (expert’s qualifications, experience and
degree of learning, the basic and logic of his
conclusions and other evidence on record)
(2) The value of expert testimony depends largely on
LA SALLIAN COMMISION ON BAR OPERATIONS
37 REMEDIAL LAW
the extent of the experience or studies of such
expert.
Note: An expert witness may base his opinion either
on the first-hand knowledge of the facts or on the
basis of hypothetical questions where the facts are
presented to him and on the assumption that they are
true, formulates his opinion on the hypothesis.
PROBATIVE VALUE OF EXPERT
EVIDENCE
ONLY when the subject of inquiry is of such a
technical nature that a layman can possibly have no
knowledge thereof that courts must depend and rely
upon experts.
Conflicting expert evidence have neutralizing effect
on contradictory conclusions. They generate doubt.
A non-expert private individual, may examine certain
contested documents, it is not necessarily null and
void if there are facts w/in his knowledge which may
help the court in the determination of the issue.
COURTS ARE NOT BOUND BY EXPERT’S TESTIMONY.
Section 49, Rule 130 of the Revised Rules of Court
states that the opinion of a witness on a matter
requiring special knowledge, skill, experience or
training, which he is shown to possess, may be
received in evidence. The use of the word "may"
signifies that the use of opinion of an expert witness
is permissive and not mandatory on the part of the
courts. Allowing the testimony does not mean, too,
that courts are bound by the testimony of the expert
witness. The testimony of an expert witness must be
construed to have been presented not to sway the
court in favor of any of the parties, but to assist the
court in the determination of the issue before it, and
is for the court to adopt or not to adopt depending on
its appreciation of the attendant facts and the
applicable law (Tabao v. People, G.R. No. 187246, 20
July 2011).
G.2. OPINION OF ORDINARY WITNESS
RULE 130
Sec. 50 . Opinion of ordinary witnesses. — The
opinion of a witness for which proper basis is given,
may be received in evidence regarding —
(a) the identity of a person about whom he has
adequate knowledge;
(b) A handwriting with which he has sufficient
familiarity; and
(c) The mental sanity of a person with whom he
is sufficiently acquainted.
The witness may also testify on his impressions of the
emotion, behavior, condition or appearance of a
person. (44a)
Ordinary Opinion Evidence - that which is given by a
witness who is of ordinary capacity and who has by
 EVIDENCE 38 REMEDIAL LAW

opportunity acquired a particular knowledge which is (a) In Criminal Cases:

outside the limits of common observation and which The accused may prove his good moral character
may be of value in elucidating a matter under which is pertinent to the moral trait involved in
consideration. the offense charged.

Shorthand Rendering of Facts Unless in rebuttal, the prosecution may not prove
Instantaneous conclusions of the mind. The witness his bad moral character which is pertinent to the
may testify as to the emotion, behavior, condition or moral trait involved in the offense charged.
appearance of a person
The good or bad moral character of the offended
The court said that the genuineness of a handwriting party may be proved if it tends to establish in any
may be proved by (not mandatory): Witness who reasonable degree the probability or
actually saw the person writing the instrument, improbability of the offense charged.
Witness familiar with the handwriting and give his
opinion thereto, opinion being an exception to the (b) In Civil Cases:
opinion rule, Comparison by the court of the Evidence of the moral character of a party in civil
questioned and admitted genuine specimen, Expert case is admissible only when pertinent to the
evidence. In order to bring about an accurate issue of character involved in the case.
comparison and analysis, the standards of comparison In the case provided for in Rule 132, Section 14,
must be as close as possible in point of time of the (46a, 47a)
suspected signature.(Domingo v. Domingo, GR No.
150897, April 11, 2005) Character- The aggregate of the moral qualities
which belong to and distinguish an individual person.
Expert Witness Rule distinguished from Ordinary
Witness Rule Character Reputation
Expert Witness Ordinary Witness Possession of person of what a person is said,
(Sec. 49, Rule (Sec. 50, Rule 130) certain qualities of mind, estimated, supposed
130) morals, distinguishing him or thought to be by
Establish Establish from others others
possession of “Sufficient Internal External
special skill, familiarity”, Reality Accepted reality by
Qualification knowledge or “adequate others
training knowledge” or
Substance Shadow
“Sufficient
acquaintance”
Rules on the Admissibility of Character Evidence:
Upon Matter is as
General Rule: Character evidence is NOT admissible
concurrence of: regards:
in evidence
Subject requires the identity of a
Ratio: The evidence of a person’s character does not
that court seeks person about whom
prove that such person acted in conformity with such
aid of men he has adequate
character or trait in a particular occasion.
specially knowledge;
skilled; A handwriting with
Witness is an which he has H.1. CHARACTER EVIDENCE IN CRIMINAL CASES
When expert who sufficient GENERAL RULE: The prosecution may not prove the
Admissible possess the familiarity; and BAD Moral Character (MC) of the accused which is
special skill, The mental sanity pertinent to the moral trait involved in the offense
knowledge or of a person with charged.
experience whom he is EXCEPTION: The prosecution may prove BAD MC at
required; and sufficiently the rebuttal stage - IF the accused, in his defense
Relevant to the acquainted. attempts to prove his GOOD MC.
matter in issue
Evidence is GOOD or BAD MC of the offended party may always be
relevant proved if such evidence tends to establish the
Hypothetical Must be based Cannot be based on probability or improbability of the offense charged.
Questions on such such
EXCEPTION TO THE EXCEPTION: Proof of the bad
H. CHARACTER EVIDENCE character of the victim is not admissible:
(a) In a murder case: If the crime was committed
RULE 130 through treachery and evident premeditation
Sec. 51 . Character evidence not generally (b) In a rape case: If through violence and
admissible; exceptions: — intimidation

LA SALLIAN COMMISION ON BAR OPERATIONS

 EVIDENCE 39 REMEDIAL LAW

(c) In prosecution for rape, evidence

complainant’s past sexual conduct, opinion
of
VI. Offer &
thereof or of his/her reputation shall not be
admitted unless, and only to the extent that the Objection
court finds that such evidence is material and A. Offer of Evidence
relevant to the case. (RA 8505) B. When to Make an Offer
C. Objection
Ratio: To avoid unfair prejudice to the accused who D. Repetition of an Objection
may be convicted because of such character. E. Ruling
F. Striking Out of an Answer
H.2. CHARACTER EVIDENCE IN CIVIL CASES G. Tender of Excluded Evidence
GENERAL RULE: Moral Character of either party can
NOT be proved A. OFFER OF EVIDENCE
EXCEPTION: Unless it is pertinent to the issue of RULE 132
character involved in the case
SEC. 34. Offer of evidence.—The court shall consider
no evidence which has not been formally offered. The
Note: Here, the issue involved must be character.
purpose for which the evidence is offered must be
(Ex. Civil actions for damages arising from the
specified.(35)
offenses of libel slander or seduction)
GENERAL RULE: The court shall consider no evidence
In BOTH Criminal and Civil Cases
which has not been formally offered. The purpose for
BAD moral character of a witness may always be
proved by either party but NOT evidence of his which the evidence is offered must be specified.
character, UNLESS it has been impeached. EXCEPTION: If there was repeated reference thereto
in the course of the trial by adverse party’s counsel
and of the court, indicating that the documents were
part of the prosecution’s evidence.

Two requisites must concur:

(1) The document must have been duly identified by
testimony duly recorded.
(2) The document must have been incorporated to
the records of the case.
(Laborate v. Pagsanhan Tourism Consumers
Cooperative, GR No. 183860, January 15, 2014)

Evidence may be considered despite failure to

formally offer if exhibits which were not formally
offered by the prosecution were repeatedly referred
to in the course of the trial by the counsel of the
accused. (People v. Vivencio De Roxas et al., 116
Phil. 977, 1962)

Purpose Why Offer Must be Specified

To determine whether that piece of evidence should
be admitted or not because such evidence may be
admissible for several purposes under the doctrine of
multiple admissibility.

Necessity of following what is Stated in the Offer

It must be rejected if it is inadmissible for the
purpose stated even if it is admissible for another
purpose.

B. WHEN TO MAKE AN OFFER

RULE 132
SEC. 35. When to make offer.—As regards the
testimony of a witness, the offer must be made at the
time the witness is called to testify.

LA SALLIAN COMMISION ON BAR OPERATIONS

 EVIDENCE 40 REMEDIAL LAW

Documentary and object evidence shall be offered at all be offered as evidence.

after the presentation of a party's testimonial
evidence. Such offer shall be done orally unless If they are not formally offered in evidence – such
allowed by the court to be done in writing, (n) cannot be considered as evidence nor can they be
given any evidentiary value.
When to Make an Offer: Depends on its form:
Testimonial/Oral Documentary and Object Note: The SC has admitted evidence to prove
Evidence Evidence mitigating circumstance even if they are not
At the time the witness After the party has presented or offered in evidence considering the
is called to testify presented his testimonial gravity of the offense and the interest of justice.
evidence, before he rests
Oral Evidence is Always Offered only once
Offered 2x: C. OBJECTION
Before the witness RULE 132
testified SEC. 36. Objection.—Objection to evidence offered
Every time a question is orally must be made immediately after the offer is
asked of him (implied made.
offer)
Objection to a question propounded in the course of
PROCEDURE BEFORE DOCUMENTARY AND the oral examination of a witness shall be made as
OBJECT EVIDENCE CAN BE CONSIDERED BY THE soon as the grounds therefor shall become reasonably
COURT apparent.

MARKING An offer of evidence in writing shall be objected to

To facilitate their identification. May be made during within three (3) days after notice of the offer unless a
pre-trial or trial. different period is allowed by the court.

IDENTIFICATION In any case, the grounds for the objections must be

specified. (36a)
Proof that the document being presented is the same
one referred to by the witness in his testimony CLASSIFICATIONS OF OBJECTIONS
AUTHENTICATION General Objection Specific Objection
It does not go beyond declaring It states why or
Proof of a document’s due execution and the evidence as immaterial, how the evidence
genuineness. incompetent, irrelevant or is irrelevant or
inadmissible. It does not specify incompetent.
FORMAL OFFER the grounds for objection.
After the termination of the testimonial evidence, the “Broadside Objection”
proponent will then make a formal offer and state the
purpose for which the document is presented. Requirements to Exclude Inadmissible Evidence:
- If the evidence is excluded, an offer of proof (1) One has to object to the evidence
(2) The objection must be timely made and
OBJECTIONS (3) The grounds for the objection must be specified
(specific objections)
It is only when the proponent rests his case and
formally offers the evidence that an objection may be
made. Objection prior thereto is premature
EFFECT OF GENERAL OBJECTION
Failure to specify the grounds is a waiver of
Identification and Authentication is Not needed in objection.
private documents
If there is a stipulation on its due execution and BUT when evidence is excluded upon a mere general
genuineness: objection, the ruling will be upheld IF any ground in
✓ Authentication is NOT needed in public fact existed for the exclusion.
documents.
✓ Marking and identifying of evidence as an exhibit WHEN TO MAKE OBJECTION
does NOT mean that it has been offered as part
(If not made w/in such time = waived)
of evidence.

Evidence identified and marked as exhibits may be

withdrawn before the formal offer thereof or may not

LA SALLIAN COMMISION ON BAR OPERATIONS

 EVIDENCE
Offer Time to Object
Offered orally Made immediately after the
offer is made
Question Made as soon as the grounds
propounded in the thereof shall become
course of the oral reasonably apparent
examination of a
witness
Offer of evidence in W/in 3 days after notice of
writing the offer unless a different
period is allowed by the
court.
Note: the formal offer of evidence at the time the
witness is called to testify is necessary to enable the
court to intelligently rule on any objection.
Proponent must: Show its evidence, materiality and
competence
Adverse party must: Promptly raise any objection
thereto
Note: A document admitted not as an independent
evidence but merely as part of the testimony of a
witness does NOT constitute proof of the facts related
therein.
It was premature to exclude the confession of
Consunji and Panganiban. Lower court should admit
the extra-judicial confession. Sec 14 Rule 123 of the
Rules of Court is specific as to the admissibility of the
extrajudicial confession of an accused, freely and
voluntarily made, as evidence against him. Besides,
the prosecution had not yet offered the confessions to
prove conspiracy between the accused, nor as
evidence against both of them.(People v. Yatco, 97
Phil 940, 1955)
GENERAL RULE: The proponent must show its
relevancy, materiality and competency. Where the
proponent offers evidence deemed by counsel of the
adverse party to be inadmissible for any reason, the
latter has the right to object. But such right is a mere
privilege which can be waived. The objection must be
made at the earliest opportunity, lest silence when
there is opportunity to speak may operate as a waiver
of objections
In the case, petitioner waived this procedural error by
failing to object at the appropriate time (when
Maxima was called to the witness stand). Petitioner
Catuira only objected AFTER the prosecution ha
presented its evidence (waiver). (Catuira v. CA, 263
SCRA 298, 1994)
LA SALLIAN COMMISION ON BAR OPERATIONS
41 REMEDIAL LAW
D. REPETITION OF AN OBJECTION
RULE 132
SEC. 37. When repetition of objection
unnecessary.—When it becomes reasonably apparent
in the course of the examination of a witness that the
questions being propounded are of the same class as
those to which objection has been made, whether
such objection was sustained or overruled, it shall not
be necessary to repeat the objection, it being
sufficient for the adverse party to record his
continuing objection to such class of questions.(37a)
Here, the party may just enter a general and
continuing objection to the same class of evidence
and the ruling of the court shall be applicable to all
such evidence of the same class.
The court may also motu proprio treat the objection
as a continuing one.
E. RULING
RULE 132
SEC. 38. Ruling. — The ruling of the court must be
given immediately after the objection is made, unless
the court desires to take a reasonable time to inform
itself on the question presented; but the ruling shall
always be made during the trial and at such time as
will give the party against whom it is made an
opportunity to meet the situation presented by the
ruling.
The reason for sustaining or overruling an objection
need not be stated. However, if the objection is
based on two or more grounds, a ruling sustaining the
objection on one or some of them must specify the
ground or grounds relied upon.(38a)
The ruling of the court must be given:
✓ immediately AFTER the objection is made,
✓ UNLESS the court desires to take a reasonable
time to inform itself on the question presented;
✓ but the ruling shall ALWAYS be made:
(1) during the trial and
(2) at such time as will give the party against
whom it is made an opportunity to meet the
situation presented by the ruling.
The reason for sustaining or overruling an objection
need not be stated.
However, IF the objection is based on two or more
grounds: a ruling sustaining the objection on one or
some of them must specify the ground or grounds
relied upon. (38a)
The court should only consider evidence for the
purpose for which it was offered.
When Should the Ruling Be Made?
 EVIDENCE 42 REMEDIAL LAW

GENERAL RULE: Parties who object is entitled to a

ruling at the time the objection is made. If no ruling
is made, it would prejudice the rights of the client
since there would be no way of knowing if one would
be compelled to meet any evidence.
The attorney must inform the court of the lack of
ruling – IF NOT:
GENERAL RULE: The case cannot be reopened on
such ground. The right to object is deemed waived
and cannot be raised on appeal.
EXCEPTION: When there is a serious prejudice on
substantial rights – the appellate court may consider
it a reversible error.
EXCEPTION TO THE EXCEPTION: Unless the parties
present a question to which the court desired to
inform itself before making its ruling.
Here, it is proper for the court to take reasonable
time to study the questions.
G. TENDER OF EXCLUDED EVIDENCE
RULE 132
SEC. 40. Tender of excluded evidence.—If documents
or things offered in evidence are excluded by the
court, the offeror may have the same attached to or
made part of the record. If the evidence excluded is
oral, the offeror may state for the record the same
and other personal circumstances of the witness and
the substance of the proposed testimony.(n)
Rationale of the Requirement of Attaching Evidence
So that in case of appeal, the appellate court may be
able to examine the same and determined the
propriety of their rejection - Since Documents
forming no part of proofs before the appellate court
cannot be considered in disposing of the case,
otherwise that would infringe upon the constitutional
right of the adverse party to due process.

F. STRIKING OUT OF AN ANSWER
RULE 132
SEC. 39. Striking out answer.—Should a witness
answer the question before the adverse party had the
opportunity to voice fully its objection to the same,
and such objection is found to be meritorious, the
court shall sustain the objection and order the answer
given to be stricken off the record.
It is the better practice to unite with the record
exhibits which have been rejected and that such
rejected or excluded exhibits should have been
permitted by the judge a quo to be attached to the
record even if not admitted in evidence, so that in
case of an appeal, the court ad quem may thus be
able to examine said exhibits and to judge whether or
not their rejection was erroneous. (Lamagan v. Dela
Cruz, 40 SCRA 101, 1971)

On proper motion, the court may also order the

striking out of answers which are incompetent,
irrelevant, or otherwise improper.(n)

On proper motion, the court may also order the

striking out of answers which are incompetent,
irrelevant, or otherwise improper. (n)

Mode of Excluding Inadmissible Evidence

(1) Objection when the evidence is offered
(2) Motion to strike out or Expunge – proper in the
following cases:
✓ When the witness answers prematurely
before there is reasonable opportunity for
the party to object (Sec 39)
✓ Unresponsive answers
✓ Answers that are incompetent, irrelevant, or
improper (Sec 39)
Note: There must be an objection before motion to
strike.

Objection to documentary evidence must be made at

the time it is formally offered as an exhibit and not
before. Objection prior to that time is premature.

Objection to the Identification and marking of the

document is not equivalent to objection to the
document when it is formally offered in evidence.
What really matters is the objection to the document
at the time it is formally offered as an exhibit.

LA SALLIAN COMMISION ON BAR OPERATIONS