Inadmissibility of recorded telephone conversations

SALCEDO-ORTANEZ vs CA, G.R. No. 110662 August 4, 1994

Facts: Rafael S. Ortanez filed with the RTC a complaint for annulment of
marriage with damages against Teresita Salcedo-Ortanez, on grounds of lack
of marriage license and/or psychological incapacity of the latter. Rafael
offered in evidence three (3) cassette tapes of alleged telephone
conversations between Teresita and unidentified persons. Teresita objected
but
the
court
admitted
the
same
in
evidence.
Issue: WON the three (3) cassette tapes admissible in evidence.
Ruling: Absent a clear showing that both parties to the telephone
conversations allowed the recording of the same, the inadmissibility of the
subject tapes is mandatory under Rep. Act No. 4200.
Rep. Act No. 4200 entitled "An Act to Prohibit and Penalize Wire Tapping and
Other Related Violations of the Privacy of Communication, and for other
purposes" expressly makes such tape recordings inadmissible in evidence.
Whether the recordings of the telephone conversations are admissible
in evidence
Ruling:
No. These tape recordings were made and obtained when private
respondent allowed his friends from the military to wire tap his home
telephone.
R.A. No. 4200 entitled An Act to Prohibit and Penalize Wire Tapping and
Other Related Violations of the Privacy of Communication, and for other
purposes expressly makes such tape recordings inadmissible in evidence.
Absent a clear showing that both parties to the telephone
conversations allowed the recording of the same, the inadmissibility of the
subject tapes is mandatory under Rep. Act No. 4200.