Mere photocopy, TAMA if offered as documentary evidence.

But is the deed of mortgage is to prove its existence and due execution.

Once it is a public document – Notaries.

Officer of the court ang notary public.

Once acknowledge before the notary public they are considered as Public documents.

The forensic laboratory report, they are public document.

Audit reports are considered public documents. They are executed by virtue of an official or by a public
government. In their sovereign capacity.

Private document in a deed or instrument, executed by a private individual, without the intervention of
a notary public.

As long as it is not notarize or it is not executed by a public official in their sovereign capacity.

Ano naman kung public document?

Well, imporant: Public documents are ADMISSABLE in EVIDENCE W/O THE NEED OF PROVING or
PROVIDING or OFFERING PRELIMINARY PROOF as to the AUTHENTICITY and EXECUTION OF SUCH
DOCUMENT.

Have the presumption of regulation.

To contradict, the opposing, Clear convincing that the document is irregularly prepared.

Unlike, private document, it shall be prove that it was executed.

Supposed there is a notarized agreement between a parties, it was shown that the fans of the
employees were utilized as an investment classified as an employee’s trust fund.

Because it is notarized there is the presumption that it proves fans as employees’ trust fund.

Drug-related cases, that the white crystalline product is shabu? There must be a laboratory test,
conducted by an expert.

Ngayon meron ng chemistry report, is that a public document? YES!

Dati chemistry report d notarize, but there is no need to be notarized. But it is a public document done
by a public officer in its sovereign capacity therefore, it is a public document.

SC: the chemistry report showing a positive report of the paraffin test, is a public document, or a shabu.

As a public document, the rule on authentication does not apply.

Why it is not applicable? Because it is a public document, it is assumed authenticated.

A chemistry report is admissible as evidence without proof geniuses because it is a public document. In
fact the person who report, does not need to appear in court.

IT is necessary for the chemistry expert to appear in court? No.

Pero bakit meron foreignsic chemical officer? Kasi sila nag dadala ng shabu.

Sinasabi na lang yan for records purposes.

How many times have you testified in court? Thousands of time.

Makipag stipulate na kayo.

Why no need presenting the person who present the document, although sa drugs pine present tlga
because of chain of custody, why is public document admissible and presumed it is duly authenticated?

Sabi ng SC: a public document is self-authenticating. The fact it is notarized or executed by a government
official in his sovereign capacity is self-authenticating. The nature as it is public or private determines
how it is presented in court.

Self authenticating. It requires no further authentication in order to be presented as an evidence in

court.

While a private document, is any other writing or deed or instrument executed by a private person
without the intervention of a public official or notary public, lacking the required by law. Therefore, a
private document requires authentication.

How do we authenticate a private document:

Authenticated in a manner allowed by the rules of court, before that private document be admitted in
court. In a judicial controversy.

Regarding a notice of dishonor – Criminal law, bouncing checks law BP 22. – esteleto Mendoza.

Notice of dishonor, that drawer or maker of the check, given 5 banking days within which to settle in
full. The amount of the check or to negotiate. Walang violation ng BP 22

Pero if more than 5 days from notice of dishonor. There is now a violation of law.

Written notice of dishonor is documentary evidence.

A notice of dishonor drawer or maker thus is indispensable as evidence.

Now who will send the demand letter? – the offended party or the drawee bank.
Notice of dishonor must be in writing – Documentary evidence, not object evidence, because it shall
contain the fact of dishonor and the issue to be proven, the cotain of fact of dishonor.

The lack of notice of dishonor is fatal, it is not a mere object evidence.

Statement of accounts – showing purchases, classified as private documents.

W/ the documents are admissible in evidence, sabi ng supreme court, statement of accounts showing
purchases of goods they are private documents.

Notice of dishonor is a private document. How? Natanggap mo ba?.

Since statements of accounts are private documents, their genuineness and due execution must be
proven by the proponent in court so that these pieces of evidence are admissible.

The court will issue, a summons. The defendant should file his answer within 30 calendar days from
receipt of summon. Under the summary procedure, 30 calendar days from service of summon.

i.e. defendant did not file his answer. What is the remedy of the plaintiff? You can file a motion that he is
in default, but in cases governed by the rules on summary of the procedure, the motion that he is in
default is not allowed.

If declared in default, the court may decide based on the documents given. Ngayon kasi dapat may
judicial affidavit. Or may allow the plaintiff to present its evidence in so called ex-parte proceeding.

Ex-parte proceeding, Walang kalaban.

The complainant during ex-parte proceeding, what evidence will be presented? The testimony of
employees and various statement of accounts, showing purchases of products.

With respect on the admissibility of the evidence

SC: the various account, sc ruled, the same shall not be admitted in evidence by the lower court,
because the rules of court provides, the authenticity and due execution of a private document like in
this problem the various statement of account before it is received by court, must be established.

The burden of proof is still with you, how will you establish the due execution of the document?

Then you have to present a witness, who saw the document executed or written.

By any other evidence showing the genuineness of the signature or the handwriting of the maker.

Present any other evidence showing the due execution.

During authentication in court, a witness should testified that the document is genuine and was due
executed.

How shall, the due execution and authenticity be proven? By anyone, who saws the documents.

By evidence of the genuineness of the signature or handwriting of the maker.

Art of cross-examination.

The original document rule

No other evidence than the original document. No evidence, shall only be original.

Photocopy is not allowed, unless it is shown that it is not available.

General rule: present the original, subject is the content.

It is imperative, by a witness, the secondary evidence must prove the existence or due execution of the
original. Before you’ll be allowed to present a mere photocopy or secondary evidence. You have to
prove the lost and the destruction of the original.

On the part of the offeror, you have to present evidence, the absence of bad-faith on your part, the
availability of the original can.

If the unavailability of the original is because of fraud then secondary evidence cannot be admitted.

Prove first the existence of the document.

Then, prove it was executed (need witnesses to prove)

Then, to prove the lost of the document.

Then, no bad-faith

That in proven the terms or content of the document, the original of the document must be produce in
court, but before the court may allow secondary evidence, it is necessary that the offeror to prove, the
existence of the document, then prove that it was due executed. Prove the lost or destruction of the
original. Then prove that no bad faith exists in your client.

To insure the original contents.

Intended to serve as an insurance or assurance against fraudulent practices of human beings.

Protects misleading inferences, resulting from an intentional or intentional of the introduction of a

larger seat of writing.

You can insist all the other pages be presented.

May promissory note: I received the sum of on or before June 30. It is presumed that it is for sufficient
consideration.

Is the promissory note original evidence on a loan?: sympre, it contains the contents of the document,
the issue is the content of the promissory note.

A promissory note, is in an acknowledgment, solemn acknowledgement of a debt, it is a formal

commitment to repay the loan on the date, and under the condition agreed upon by the borrower and
the lender.
Once the promissory note is in the position of borrower, it is presumed as paid.

A person who signs such an instrument is bound to honor the promissory note as an obligation. A
legitimate obligation is assumed through signature. That is your promise or solemn acknowledgment to
pay the lender.

It shows a token of good-faith.

The promissory note, in case of controversy, is an original document. If it is in the position of the lender
it presumed that it is not paid. But once it in the possession of the borrower it is disputably presumed
that the loan is already been paid.

What is the original evidence of a false document?

i.e. involving signature, allegedly on a document, issue it’s a forged document.

In proving such, what is the original evidence?

SC: that the instrument itself, showing or reflecting the alleged forged signature is the original.

That document shall be presented in court to prove that such document is forged.

Gen rule: forgery cannot be presumed; thus, you have to prove by clear, positive convincing evidence,
that it is the forged one. The burden of proof lies with you (the party alleging forgery).

The document is forged,

You present it. As original evidence.

The fact of forgery can only be established by comparison between the forged signature and the
authentic and genuine signature of a person, who’s signature is alleged or claimed that it is fraud.

The judge will compare. In fact, if there is an opinion of an expert witness, is not binding by the judge.
The judge himself can make the comparison.

Judges are not bound by the expert witness, but the court may agree with the recommendation of the
expert witness.

Supposed there is no dispute regarding the contents of the contract or document. Is the original
document rule applicable?

SC: the original document rule, is not applicable if there is no dispute regarding the contents of the
contract/document.

The issue is not the content, the issue is how it is executed or delivered, thefore the original document
rule does not apply.
It does not apply when the issue is the external facts, i.e. how the document was delivered, or executed.
So what is to be presented? In such instances, since the original document rule does not apply,
secondary evidence may be presented. Without the need to explain accounting the original.

When it involves external factors, secondary evidence are admissible.

Secondary evidence may be presented, when the opponent does not dispute the document.

i.e. during pre-trial, sabi ng plaintiff, may we ask the defendant to admit the due execution and
existence of exhibit b.

“when admitted your honor, as mere to its existence”

Since the content of the document is admitted, the original document rule does not apply.

As long as the original evidence can be had, when the contents is an issue. SC cannot admit
photocopiers.

Supposed that the contents of the document are the issue in a legal controversy.

You have to present the original. But the original document is in the custody or control of the opposing
party.

So how are you going to comply?

SC: to warrant admissibility of secondary evidence will be admitted by the court, in a situation where the
original of the writing is in the custody or control of the adverse party. It is necessary, you should give
the opposing party reasonable notice to produce the original. Or, issuance of subpoena duces tecum.
Now if the opposing party fails or refuses, then under such a situation, then you can now present a
substitutionary copy or secondary evidence.

If after the proof of the existence of such document, and the opposing party fails or refuses to present
evidence, now you are allowed to present evidence secondary evidence.

Tatak alipin

A canonical certificate of marriage is not a public document, authenticity must be proven.

What if a fax or photocopy? Cannot be used. You present the original.

Secondary can be allowed, the witnesses during the marriage ceremony.

Fax copy – paper base

Email – electronic evidence.

Which are documents are original? It is the document itself or a counterpart of the same effect, i.e.
duplicate copy. Or Duplicate original.
Duplicate is admissible like the original, unless there is issue raised.

While it is true, the original document rule when the subject is the content of the document, no
evidence is admissible other than the original document. EXCEPT:

In certain cases, secondary evidence may be presented.

i.e. when it is lost or destroyed.

Or when the original is in the custody of the opposing party.

Another instance secondary evidence is allowed, is when the original of document consists of numerous
account or numerous document, or when the original document is a public record. Because of the
doctrine of immovability of a public record.

So you can secure an authenticated copy, its contents may be proved by a certified copy issued by the
public officer in custody thereof.

Is secondary evidence less reliable?

SC: secondary evidence like a photocopy, performs the same function as of that a primary evidence, but
of course since it is secondary copy it is deemed less reliable.

When original document is unavailable, secondary evidence maybe presented.

When the original is lost, and you want to present secondary evidence, there must be proof of execution
and the existence of the original evidence.

Lost or destroyed document. How would you prove the content of such a document?

Upon proof of the execution, and the existence and its inability without bad faith, then the original
documents which has been lost or destroyed?

Present copy, or a certified true copy.

What if there is no available copies? How would you prove such?

According to rules of court, you can present recitals of the contents of such documents in some
documents.

I.e. foreclosure of deed of mortgage. Usually meron newspaper, pero may recital of the content of
documents like a recital in a newspaper in general circulation. Or other publication. What if wala?

Present the testimony of witnesses.

In a case it was ruled, the non-presentation of an original bank check (kasi it was confiscated by the US
gov) now it proper to present secondary evidence.

The petitioner insisted offering a photocopies as documentary evidence, the petitioner failed to
establish such offer in accordance with the exemptions of the rules of court, so it was denied.
Sabi ng SC: the lower court did not commit any error, in denying the admissibility of the document
which is a photocopy.

Under the rules of court, party who calls for the production of document is not obliged to offer it as
evidence.

Section 8. Party who calls for document not bound to offer it. — A party who calls for the production
of a document and inspects the same is not obliged to offer it as evidence.

Is oral testimony admissible to prove a marriage? – Yes, the testimony of one of the witnesses to the
marriage ceremony is admissible to prove the fact of marriage.

In a transfer certificate of title under torrent system, there is an annotation at the back about a deed of
sale.

Is the annotation on the TCT as well as the entry on the notarial register of the notary public sufficient
proof of a deed of sale?

SC: No, its only a mere entry that there is a deed of sale, the annotation on the TCT of the deed of sale
and the entry in the book of the registry of deed even notarial book, did not establish the existence of
the deed of sale. What they prove that a deed of sale was registered on the register of deed. But the
registration alone was not conclusive proof of the authenticity of its due execution.

Because, registration is simply a ministerial act by which an instrument was escribe to the register of
deed.

It is a ministerial duty of the RD to record the said transaction, w/o identifying if it’s a valid instrument.
The purpose to give notice.

The entry on notarial prove only prove it was notarize but it does not establish its execution.