RULES OF EVIDENCE

RULE 128 - General Provisions

Section 1. Evidence defined. Evidence is the
means, sanctioned by these rules, of ascertaining
in a judicial proceeding the truth respecting a
matter of fact.
Section 3. Admissibility of evidence. Evidence is
admissible when it is RELEVANT to the issue and
IS NOT EXCLUDED BY THE LAW OF THESE
RULES (COMPETENT). (3a)
Section 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. Evidence
on collateral matters shall not be allowed, except
when it tends in any reasonable degree to establish
the probability or improbability of the fact in issue.
(determinable by the rules on logic and human
experience)
NOTES:
Rules of evidence are specifically applicable
only in judicial proceedings
Classification of evidence:
1. Object or Real evidence that which is
DIRECTLY ADDRESSED to the SENSES of
the court and consists OF TANGIBLE
THINGS
EXHIBITED
OR
DEMONSTRATED IN OPEN COURT, in an
ocular inspection or at a place designated
by the court for its view or observation of an
exhibition, experiment or demonstration.
Also referred to as autoptic preference
2. Documentary evidence evidence supplied
by written instrument or derived from
conventional symbols, such as letters, by
which ideas are represented on material
substances.
3. Testimonial evidence submitted to the
court through testimony or deposition of a
witness.
Other classifications:
a. Relevant - evidence must have such a
relation to the fact in issue as to induce
belief in its existence or non-existence.
b. Material evidence directed to prove a
fact in issue as determined by the rules
of substantive law and pleadings.
c. Competent one that is NOT excluded
by the Rules, a statute or the
Constitution.
Admissibility of evidence is determined at
the time it is offered to the court.
Multiple admissibility If immediately
AFTER THE FIGHT, in a STATE OF
EXCITEMENT AND CONSCIOUS OF HIS
IMPENDING DEATH, the declarant stated
that it was he who provoked and
commenced the assault and seriously
wounded his opponent, in a prosecution for

the death of said declarant, such declaration

may be admitted as part of the RES
GESTAE, as a DYING DECLARATION or
as a DECLARATION AGAINST INTEREST
(People vs Toledo)
Stonehill vs Diokno documentary
evidence illegally obtained, is inadmissible
in evidence on a timely motion or action to
suppress. Same rule applies to illegally
obtained confessions.
In Nuez vs Cruz-Apao, text messages were
properly admitted in evidence pursuant to
the Rules on Electronic Evidence. Such
communication shall be proven by the
testimony of a person who was a party to
the same or who has personal knowledge
thereof.
In MCC INDUSTRIAL SALES Corp vs
Ssangyong Corp the major issue therein
is whether the photocopies of transmissions
(fax) are admissible in evidence. = The
court ruled that the photocopies of
transmissions or the facsimile transmission
CANNOt be considered as an electronic
evidence. It is not the functional equivalent
of an original under the best evidence Rule
and is INADMISSIBLE IN EVIDENCE. The
terms Electronic data message and
electronic documents defined in the
electronic commerce act of 2000, do not
include a facsimile transmission. It excluded
the early forms of technology like telegraph,
telex or fax and telecopy (except computer
generated faxes)
RULE 130 RULES OF ADMISSIBILITY
An ocular inspection conducted by the judge
WITHOUT NOTICE to or the PRESENCE
OF THE PARTIES is INVALID as an ocular
inspection is part of the trial.
Object vs Documentary evidence
Object or real evidence the
PURPOSE is to PROVE the EXISTENCE of
the document, or the nature of the
handwriting, or determine the age of the
paper or the blemishes or alterations
thereon.
Documentary evidence the
purpose is to establish the CONTENTS or
TENOR thereof.
1 .BEST EVIDENCE RULE applies only when the
SUBJECT OF INQUIRY is the CONTENTS OF
THE DOCUMENT. (applicable to documentary
evidence)

Section 3. Original document must be

produced; exceptions. When the subject of
inquiry is the contents of a document, no evidence

shall be admissible other than the original

document itself, except in the following cases:

> ORIGINAL OF THE DOCUMENT is one 1. the

contents of which are the subject of inquiry.

(a) When the original has been lost or

destroyed, or cannot be produced in court, without
bad faith on the part of the offeror;

2. When a document is in two or more copies

executed at or about the same time, with identical
contents, all such copies are equally regarded as
originals.

(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;
(c) When the original consists of numerous
accounts or other documents which cannot be
examined in court without great loss of time and the
fact sought to be established from them is only the
general result of the whole; and
(d) When the original is a public record in
the custody of a public officer or is recorded in a
public office. (2a)

Section 4. Original of document.

(a) The original of the document is one the
contents of which are the subject of inquiry.
(b) When a document is in two or more
copies executed at or about the same time, with
identical contents, all such copies are equally
regarded as originals.
(c) When an entry is repeated in the regular
course of business, one being copied from another
at or near the time of the transaction, all the entries
are likewise equally regarded as originals.
> As a GENERAL RULE, original document must
be produced when the subject of inquiry is the
contents of a document,
EXCEPT: (a) When the original has been lost or
destroyed, or cannot be produced in court, without
bad faith on the part of the offeror;
(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;
(c) When the original consists of numerous
accounts or other documents which cannot be
examined in court without great loss of time and the
fact sought to be established from them is only the
general result of the whole

3. When an entry is repeated in the regular course

of business, one being copied from another at or
near the time of the transaction, all the entries are
likewise equally regarded as originals
The NON-PRODUCTION of the original
document UNLESS justified under the
exceptions, give rise to the presumption of
suppression of evidence.
With respect to documentary evidence, the
best evidence rule applies only when the
contents of such document is the subject of
inquiry.
Where the issue is only as to whether such
a document was actually executed, or
exists, or on the circumstances relevant to
or surrounding its execution, the best
evidence rule does NOT apply and
testimonial evidence is admissible.
When a document is presented to prove its
existence or condition, it is offered as real or
object evidence. Parol evidence of the fact
of execution of the document is allowed.
In criminal cases where the issue is NOT
ONLY with respect to the contents of the
document but also as to whether such
document actually existed with the
participation of the accused, the ORIGINAL
itself must be presented.
o Thus, in a prosecution for LIBEL
published in the newspaper, a copy
of said newspaper must be
produced.
o In falsification of a document,
original document involved must be
presented.
In a libel case, if the ISSUE is the Contents
of the articles sent to the accused for
publication the manuscript is the best
evidence.
- If the issue is as to what was
actually published, a copy of the
newspaper publication was the
best evidence.
2. Secondary Evidence
Section 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.
In order that such secondary evidence may
be admissible, the ff. requisites must be
present:
1. Due execution of the original
2. Loss, Destruction or unavailability of all
such originals
3. reasonable diligence and GOOD FAITH
in the search for or attempt to produce the
original

REDUCED TO WRITING, it is considered as

containing all the terms agreed upon and there can
be, between the parties and their successors in
interest, NO EVIDENCE OF SUCH TERMS
OTHER THAN THE CONTENTS OF THE
WRITTEN AGREEMENT.
As a general rule: NO EVIDENCE OF
SUCH TERMS OTHER THAN THE CONTENTS
OF THE WRITTEN AGREEMENT.
Except: when a party puts in issue in his
pleading, he may present evidence to modify,
explain or add to the terms of written agreement: if
there is
(a) An intrinsic ambiguity, mistake or imperfection
in the written agreement;

> The secondary evidence consist of or may be

presented thru : 1. Copy of said document.
2. Recital of its contents in some AUTHENTIC
DOCUMENT, or 3. By the TESTIMONY of
witnesses. (In the ORDER stated)
>when the original is outside the jurisdiction of the
court, as when it is in a foreign country, secondary
evidence is admissible (PNB vs Olila)

(b) The failure of the written agreement to express

the true intent and agreement of the parties thereto;
(c) The validity of the written agreement; or
(d) The existence of other terms agreed to by the
parties or their successors in interest after the
execution of the written agreement.

3. Parol Evidence Rule

Section 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 other than the contents of
the written agreement.

Parol evidence rule Does NOT apply where

at least one party to the suit is not a party or
privy of a party to the written instrument.
Thus, if one of the parties to the case is a
complete stranger to the contract involved
therein, he is NOT bound by this rule and
can introduce extrinsic evidence.
Parol Evidence vs Best evidence Rule

However, a party may present evidence to modify,

explain or add to the terms of written agreement if
he puts in issue in his pleading:
(a) An intrinsic ambiguity, mistake
imperfection in the written agreement;

or

(b) The failure of the written agreement to

express the true intent and agreement of
the parties thereto;
(c) The validity of the written agreement; or
(d) The existence of other terms agreed to
by the parties or their successors in interest
after the execution of the written agreement.
The term "agreement" includes wills.
Parol evidence rule it applies when THE
TERMS OF AN AGREEMENT HAVE BEEN

a. PE- presupposes that the Original

document is AVAILABLE in court.
BE- original writing is not available
and/or there is a dispute as to whether
said writing is the original
b. PE- with exceptions of wills, applies only
to
documents
which
are
CONTRACTUAL in nature.
BE- applies
documents

to

ALL

kinds

of

c. PE- can be invoked only when the

controversy is between the parties to the
written agreement, their privies, or any
party directly affected thereby

BE- can be invoked by ANY party to

an action
d. PE- prohibits the Varying of the terms of
a written agreement
BE- prohibits the Substitutionary
evidence in lieu of the original
document

In order that parol evidence may be

admissible, the mistake or imperfection of
the document, or its failure to express the
true intent and agreement of the parties, or
the validity of the agreement MUST BE PUT
IN ISSUE BY THE PLEADINGS.

Where the plaintiff failed to allege in his

complaint, he cannot introduce parol
evidence. However, if the defendant invoked
such fact in his answer, parol evidence may
be introduced as such fact is now put in
issue. Furthermore, even if such defences
were not raised in the pleadings, but parol
evidence is NOT OBJECTED to, such
objection is deemed waived. Such mistake
or imperfection must be proved by clear and
convincing evidence. (tolentino etal vs
Gonzales Sy Chiam)

Intrinsic or latent ambiguity when the

writing on its face appears clear and
unambiguous BUT there are collateral
matters or circumstances which make the
meaning uncertain or where a writing admits
of two construction.
o

Ex. Where the document refers to a

particular person but there are two
persons having the same name.

The phrase capacity of 6,000 liters

used in connection with a distilling
apparatus was held to be a
LATENT/INTRINSIC ambiguity
which had to be clarified by PAROL
Evidence to determine whether it
meant the receiving, treating or the
producing capacity of the machine.

Extrinsic or patent ambiguity ambiguity

which is apparent on the face of the writing
itself. Parol evidence is NOT admissible
No express trust concerning an immovable
or any interest therein may be proved by
parol evidence.

Factual issues must be proved thru presentation of

evidence.
As a GENERAL RULE, All facts in issue and
relevant facts must be proven in court by means of
evidence. Except:
1. Allegations containing in the complaint or
answer which are immaterial to the issue.
2. Facts which are admitted or not denied in
answer, provided, they have been
sufficiently alleged. (during the pre-trial
conference)
3. Those which are the subject of agreed
statement of facts between the parties.
(when the remaining issue is PURE LEGAL
issue, the court may render a decision
without a trial on the merits of the case)
4. Facts admitted by the parties in the judicial
proceeding.
5. Facts which are legally presumed. (Judicial
Notice)
6. Facts peculiarly within the knowledge of the
parties.
The following exceptions need not
be proved by evidence.