Documentos de Académico
Documentos de Profesional
Documentos de Cultura
3 of Rule 130)
A:
GR: It provides that when the subject of the
inquiry is the contents of the document, no
evidence shall be admissible other than the
original document itself.
XPNs: LCNP
1. 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 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;
3. When the original consists of numerous
accounts or other documents which
ca nnot 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;
Note: The voluminous records must be
made accessible to the adverse party so
that the correctness of the portion
produced or summary of the document
may be tested on cross-examination.
4. When the original is a public record in the
custody of a public officer or is recorded
in a public office (Sec. 3)
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.
Jurisprudence dictates that an affidavit is merely hearsay evidence where its affiant/maker
did not take the witness stand.21 The sworn statement of Ignacio is of this kind. The affidavit
was not identified and its averments were not affirmed by affiant Ignacio. Accordingly,
Exhibit "3" must be excluded from the judicial proceedings being an inadmissible hearsay
evidence. It cannot be deemed a declaration against interest for the matter to be considered
as an exception to the hearsay rule because the declarant was not the seller (Emilio), but
his father (Ignacio). Exhibit "4," on the other hand, is considered secondary evidence being
a mere photocopy which, in this case, cannot be admitted to prove the contents of the
purported undated handwritten receipt. The best evidence rule requires that the highest
available degree of proof must be produced. For documentary evidence, the contents of a
document are best proved by the production of the document itself to the exclusion of
secondary or substitutionary evidence, pursuant to Rule 130, Section 322.
A secondary evidence is admissible only upon compliance with Rule 130, Section 5, which
states that: when the original 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.
Accordingly, the offeror of the secondary evidence is burdened to satisfactorily prove the
predicates thereof, namely: (1) the execution or existence of the original; (2) the loss and
destruction of the original or its non-production in court; and (3) the unavailability of the
original is not due to bad faith on the part of the proponent/offeror. Proof of the due
execution of the document and its subsequent loss would constitute the basis for the
introduction of secondary evidence.23 In MCC Industrial Sales Corporation v. Ssangyong
Corporation,24 it was held that where the missing document is the foundation of the action,
more strictness in proof is required than where the document is only collaterally involved.
A:
1. There must be a valid contract;
2. The terms of the agreement must be
reduced to writing;
3. The dispute is between the parties or their
successors-in-interest; and
4. There is dispute as to the terms of the
agreement.
Note: Parol evidence rule does not apply, and may not
properly be invoked by either party to the litigation
against the other, where at least one party to the suit
is not a party or privy of a party to the written
instrument in question and does not base a claim or
assert a right originating in the instrument of the
relation established thereby. 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 against the efficacy of the
writing. (Lechugas v. CA et.al., G.R. Nos. L-39972 & L40300,
Aug. 6,
1986)
A:
1. Admission by a co-partner or agent (Sec.
29, Rule 130);
2. Admission by a co-conspirator (Sec. 30,
Rule 130); and
3. Admission by privies (Sec. 31, Rule 130)
A:
1. Those which the courts may take judicial
notice (Rule 129);
2. Those that are judicially admitted (Rule
129);
3. Those that are conclusively presumed (Rule
131); and
4. Those that are disputably presumed but
uncontradicted (Rule 131).
A:
1. Those statements which are the very facts
in issue;
2. Those statements which are
circumstantial evidence of the fact in
issue. It includes the following:
a. Statements of a person showing his
state of mind, that is, his mental
condition, knowledge, belief,
intention, ill-will and other emotions;
b. Statements of a person which show
his physical condition, as illness and
the like;
c. Statements of a person from which
an inference may be made as to the
state of mind of another, i.e., the
knowledge, belief, motive, good or
bad faith, etc. of the latter;
d. Statements which may identify the
date, place and person in question;
and
e. Statements showing the lack of
credibility of a witness.
c. EXCEPTIONS TO THE HEARSAY RULE
A:
1. Dying declaration;
2. Declaration against interest;
3. Act or declaration about pedigree;
4. Family reputation or tradition regarding
pedigree;
5. Common reputation;
6. Part of the res gestae;
7. Entries in the course of business;
8. Entries in official records;
9. Commercial lists and the like;
10. Learned treaties;
11. Testimony or deposition at a former trial.
A:
1. The declaration is one made by a dying person;
2. The declaration was made by said dying person
under a consciousness of his impending death;
3. The declaration refers to the cause and
circumstances surrounding the death of the
declarant and not of anyone else;
4. The declaration is offered in a case wherein
the declarant’s death is the subject of the
inquiry; and
5. The declarant is competent as a witness
had he survived. (Geraldo v. People, G.R.
No. 173608, Nov. 20, 2008; Riano,
Evidence: A Restatement for the Bar, p.
370, 2009 ed.)
A:
1. The principal act or the res gestae is a
startling occurrence;
2. The statement is spontaneous or was
made before the declarant had time to
contrive or devise, and the statement is
made during the occurrence or
immediately prior or subsequent thereto;
and
3. The statement made must concern the
occurrence in question and it’s
immediately attending circumstances
(Capila v. People, G.R. No. 146161, July
17, 2006).
Here, aside from the extrajudicial confession, which was later on recanted,
no other piece of evidence was presented to prove the alleged conspiracy. There
was no other prosecution evidence, direct or circumstantial, which the extrajudicial
confession could corroborate. Therefore, the recanted confession of Columna,
which was the sole evidence against respondents, had no probative value and was
inadmissible as evidence against them.
Section 28. Hearsay exception in child abuse cases. - A statement made by a child
describing any act or attempted act of child abuse, not otherwise admissible under the
hearsay rule, may be admitted in evidence in any criminal or non-criminal proceeding
subject to the following rules:
(a) Before such hearsay statement may be admitted, its proponent shall make
known to the adverse party the intention to offer such statement and its particulars to
provide him a fair opportunity to object. If the child is available, the court shall, upon
motion of the adverse party, require the child to be present at the presentation of the
hearsay statement for cross-examination by the adverse party. When the child is
unavailable, the fact of such circumstance must be proved by the proponent.
(b) In ruling on the admissibility of such hearsay statement, the court shall consider
the time, content and circumstances thereof which provide sufficient indicia of
reliability. It shall consider the following factors:
(5) The timing of the statement and the relationship between the declarant
child and witness;
(6) Cross-examination could not show the lack of knowledge of the declarant
child;
(7) The possibility of faulty recollection of the declarant child is remote; and
(8) The circumstances surrounding the statement are such that there is no
reason to suppose the declarant child misrepresented the involvement of the
accused.
(c) The child witness shall be considered unavailable under the following situations:
(2) Is absent from the hearing and the proponent of his statement has been
unable to procure his attendance by process or other reasonable means.
(d) When the child witness is unavailable, his hearsay testimony shall be admitted
only if corroborated by other admissible evidence.
3. DISQUALIFICATIONS OF WITNESSES
A:
1. The defendant in the case is the executor
or the administrator or a representative
of the deceased or the person of unsound
mind;
2. The case is against the executor or the
administrator or a representative of the /witness
is the plaintiff/assignor/person on whose behalf
the case is prosecuted
deceased or the person of unsound mind;
3. The subject matter of the action is a claim
or demand against the estate of a
deceased person or a person of unsound
mind; and
4. The testimony is as to any matter of fact
occurring before the death of such
deceased person or before such person
became of unsound mind.
ADMISSION BY SILENCE