REVISED RULES ON EVIDENCE

RULE 128

Sec. 1. Evidence – is the means, sanctioned by the rules, of ascertaining in a judicial

proceeding the truth respecting a matter of fact.

Four component elements:

1. Means of ascertainment – includes not only the procedure or manner of ascertainment but
also the evidentiary fact from which the truth respecting a matter of fact may be ascertained

2. Sanctioned by the rules – not excluded by the Rules of Court

3. In a judicial proceeding – contemplates an action or proceeding filed in a court of law

4. The truth respecting a matter of fact – refers to an issue of fact and is both substantive
(determines the facts needed to be established) and procedural (governs the manner of proving
said facts).

Why is evidence required?

It is required because of the presumption that the court is not aware of the veracity of the
facts involved in a case. It is therefore incumbent upon the parties to prove a fact in issue thru the
presentation of admissible evidence

 Every evidential question involves the relationship between the factum probans and the
factum probandum.

FACTUM PROBANDUM - the ultimate fact sought to be established. (HYPOTHETICAL)

(The term “ultimate fact” means an essential facts constituting the plaintiff’s cause of action.)

NOTE: If fact is admitted, there is no more factum probandum because there is no fact in issue.

FACTUM PROBANS - the material evidencing the proposition. It is the fact by which the
factum probandum is established or the “Intermediate facts”. (EXISTENT)

Sec. 2. Scope – The rules of evidence shall be the same in all courts and in all trials and
hearings.
 *The rules of evidence of the Rules of Court are guided by the “Principle of
Uniformity”

*The rules of evidence is only applicable in judicial proceedings. In quasi-judicial

proceedings the same apply by analogy or in suppletory character and whenever practicable and
convenient (Rule 1, sec. 4, In what cases not applicable - Election cases, land registration,
cadastral, naturalization and insolvency proceedings, and other cases not herein provided for)
Excpet the governing law on that particular proceeding specifically adopts the rules on evidence
in the ROC.

EVIDENCE IN CIVIL CASE and CRIMINAL CASE DISTINGUISHED:

In civil case, the party having the burden of proof must prove his claim by
preponderance of evidence, while, in Criminal Case, the guilt of the accused has to be proven
beyond reasonable doubt.

DISTINGUISH PROOF FROM EVIDENCE:

Proof is the effect when the requisite quantum of evidence of a particular fact has been
duly admitted and given weight, while Evidence is the mode and manner of proving competent
facts in judicial proceedings.

Sec. 3. Admissibility of Evidence – Evidence is admissible when it is relevant to the

issue and is not excluded by the law or these rules.

Two elements must concur to be admissible:

1. That the evidence is relevant;

2. That the evidence is not excluded by the rules (competent)

Types of Admissibility:

1. Multiple Admissibility – when the evidence is relevant and competent for two or
more purposes;
2. Conditional Admissibility - evidence that which appears to be immaterial is admitted
by the court subject to the condition that its connection with other facts subsequently
to be proved will be established;
3. Curative Admissibility – allows a party to introduce otherwise inadmissible evidence
to contradict the opposing party’s previous introduction of inadmissible evidence.
 Sec. 4. Relevancy; collateral matters – Evidence must have such a relation to the fact in
issue as to induce belief in its existence or non-existence;

Collateral matters – facts or matters which are not in issue. They are not generally
allowed to be proven except when relevant.

NOTE: No evidence is admissible unless it is relevant. However, relevancy alone does not make
the evidence admissible. It is not admissible because although relevant, it may be incompetent, it
is excluded by law or a particular rule or by both.