INTRODUCTION

DEFINITION of Evidence:
The means, sanctioned by these rules, of ascertaining in a judicial proceeding, the truth respecting a
matter of fact.(Rule 128, Sec. 1)

The mode and manner of proving competent facts in judicial proceedings. (Bustos v. Lucero)

SCOPE
General Rule: Rules of evidence shall be the same in all courts and in all trials and hearings

Exception: If otherwise provided by:

1) law;
2) ROC.

CLASSIFICATION
Rules Of Court CLASSIFICATION ACCORDING TO FORM
1) OBJECT – Directly addressed to the senses of the court (Rule 130, Sec.1)

Referred to as real evidence or evidence by “autoptic preference”.

2) DOCUMENTARY - Consist of writing or any material containing modes of written expression

(i.e. words, numbers, figures, symbols) offered as proof of their contents. (Rule 130, Sec. 2)

3) TESTIMONIAL - Submitted to the court through the testimony or deposition of a witness.

OTHER CLASSIFICATIONS [Regalado]

1) DIRECT – Proves the fact in dispute without aid of any inference or presumption.

CIRCUMSTANTIAL – Proof of fact/s from which, taken singly/collectively, the existence of the
particular fact in dispute may be inferred as a necessary/probable consequence. It is evidence of
relevant collateral facts.

2) CUMULATIVE – Evidence of the same kind and to the same state of facts.

CORROBORATIVE – Additional evidence of a different character to the same point.

3) PRIMA FACIE – That which, standing alone, is sufficient to maintain the proposition affirmed.

CONCLUSIVE – That class of evidence which the law does not allow to be contradicted.

4) PRIMARY – (Best evidence) The law regards these as affording the greatest certainty of the fact
in question.

SECONDARY – (Substitutionary evidence) Permitted by law only when the best evidence is
unavailable.

5) POSITIVE – When a witness affirms that a fact did or did not occur (there is personal
knowledge).

NEGATIVE – When witness states that he did not see or know of the occurrence of a fact (total
disclaimer of personal knowledge).

EVIDENCE COMPARED TO PROOF

- It is the result or effect of evidence; when the requisite quantum of evidence of a particular fact has
been duly admitted and given weight, the result is called the proof of such fact.

TO FACTUM PROBANDUM
- The ultimate fact or the fact sought to be established. It refers to the proposition (e.g. victim was
stabbed).

TO FACTUM PROBANS
- The evidentiary fact or the fact by which the factum probandum is to be established; refers to the
materials that establish the proposition (e.g. bloody knife)
Scope
The rules of evidence shall be the same in all courts and in all
trials and hearings, except as otherwise provided by law or these
rules.

Classification of Evidence According to Form

1. Objective or Real Evidence
   directly addressed to the senses of the court and consist of
   tangible things exhibited or demonstrated in open court, in an
   ocular inspection, or at place designated by the court for its
   view or observation of an exhibition, experiment or demonstration.
   This is referred to as autoptic preference.
2. Documentary Evidence
   evidence supplied by written instruments or derived from
   conventional symbols, such as letters, by which ideas are
   represented on material substances.
3. Testimonial Evidence
   is that which is submitted to the court through the testimony or
   deposition of a witness.

Relevant Evidence 
evidence having any value in reason as tending to prove any matter
provable in an action. The test is the logical relation of the
evidentiary fact to the fact in issue, whether the former tends to
establish the probability or improbability of the latter.
Material Evidence
evidence directed to prove a fact in issue as determined by the rules
of substantive law and pleadings. The test is whether the fact it
intends to prove is an issue or not. AS to whether a fact is in issue
or not is in turn determined by the substantive law, the pleadings,
the pre-trial order and by the admissions or confessions on file.
Consequently, evidence may be relevant but may be immaterial in the
case.

Competent Evidence
one that is not excluded by this Rules, a stature or the Constitution.

Direct Evidence
that which proves the fact in dispute without the aid of any
inference or presumption.

Circumstantial Evidence
is the proof of a fact or facts from which taken either singly or
collectively, the existence or a particular fact in dispute may be
inferred as a necessary or probable consequence.

Cumulative Evidence
evidence of the same kind and to the same state of facts.

Corroborative Evidence
is additional evidence of a difference character to the same point.

Prima Facie Evidence

that which is standing alone, unexplained or uncontradicted, is
sufficient to maintain the proposition affirmed.

Conclusive Evidence
the class of evidence which the law does not allow to be contradicted.

Primary Evidence
that which the law regards as affording the greatest certainty of the
fact in question. Also referred to as the best evidence.

Secondary Evidence
that which is inferior to the primary evidence and is permitted by
law only when the best evidence is not available. Known as the
substitutionary evidence.

Positive Evidence
when the witness affirms that a fact did or did not occur. Entitled
to a greater weight since the witness represents of his personal
knowledge the presence or absence of a fact.

Negative Evidence
when the witness did not see or know of the occurrence of a fact.
There is a total disclaimer of persona knowledge, hence without any
representation or disavowal that the fact in question could or could
not have existed or happened. It is admissible only if it tends to
contradict positive evidence of the other side or would tend to
exclude the existence of fact sworn to by the other side.

What do the rules of evidence determine?

All rights and liabilities are dependent upon and arise out of facts.

Every judicial proceeding whatever has for its purpose the ascertaining
of some right or liability. If the proceeding is Criminal, the object
is to ascertain the liability to punishment of the person accused.
If the proceeding is Civil, the object is to ascertain some right of
property or status, or the right of one party and the liability of
other to some form of relief.

Two branches of the law of procedure

1. The law of the pleadings which determines the questions in a
   dispute between the parties
2. The law of evidence, which determines how the party can convince
   the court of the existence of facts which according to the provisions
   of substantive law, would establish the existence of the right or
   liability which they allege to exist.

Why should the rule of evidence be uniform?

1. The relation between the evidentiary fact and a particular proposition
   is always the same, without regard to the kind of litigation in which
   that proposition becomes material to be proved.
2. If the rules of evidence prescribe the best course to arrive at the
   truth, that must be and are the same in all civilized countries.

Differences in the Rules of Evidence in Criminal and Civil Cases

1. Criminal Cases
   The accused attends by compulsion

   Civil Cases
   Parties attend by accord

2. Criminal Cases
   Presumption of innocence attends the accused throughout the trial
   until the same has been overcome by prima facie evidence of his
   guilt.

   Civil Cases
   There is no presumption as to either party.

3. Criminal Cases
   It is an implied admission of guilt.

   Civil Cases
   An offer to compromise does not as a general rule amount to an
   admission of liability.

4. Criminal Cases
   Guilt beyond reasonable doubt

   Civil Cases
   Must prove by preponderance of evidence: Reason is that there is
   no presumption and due to the fact that the proof will only result
   in a judgment of pecuniary damages or establish Civil Right.

Any evidence inadmissible according to the laws in force at the time

the action accrued, but admissible according to the laws in force at
the time of the trial, is receivable. There is no vested right of
property in rules of evidence.

      Reason: The rules of evidence are merely methods for

      ascertaining facts. It must be supposed that change of law
      merely makes it more likely that the fact will be truly
      ascertained, either by admitting evidence whose former
      suppression or by suppressing evidence helped to conceal the
      truth.

There are rules of evidence established merely for the protection of

the parties. If according to the well-established doctrine, the
parties may waive such rules during the trial of a case, there is no
reason why they cannot make the waiver in a contract. However, if the
rule of evidence waived by the parties has been established by law on
grounds of public policy, the waiver is void.

Admissibility of Evidence
2 Axioms of Admissibility
1. None but facts having rational probative value are admissible.
2. All facts having rational probative value are admissible unless
   some specific rule forbids their admission.

The Admissibility of Evidence is Determined at the Time it is Offered

to the Court.

Heirs of Sabanpan v. Comorposa (2003)

   The admissibility of evidence should not be confused with its
   probative value.

   Admissibility refers to the question of whether certain pieces of

   evidence are to be considered at all, while probative value refers
   to the question of whether the admitted evidence proves an issue.

   Thus, a particular item of evidence may be admissible, but its

   evidentiary weight depends on judicial evaluation within the
   guidelines provided by the rules of evidence

Every objection to the admissibility of evidence shall be made at

the time such evidence is offered, or as soon thereafter as the
objection to its admissibility shall have become apparent, otherwise
the objection shall be considered waived.

Certain Doctrines or Rules of Admissibility

1. Conditional admissibility
   Where the evidence at the time of its offer appears to be immaterial
   or irrelevant unless it is connected with the other facts to be
   subsequently proved, such evidence may be received ob condition
   that the other facts will be proved thereafter, otherwise the
   evidence given will be stricken out.
   This is subject to the qualification that there should be no bad
   faith on the part of the proponent.
2. Multiple admissibility
   Where the evidence is relevant and competent for two or more purposes,
   such evidence should be admitted for any or all the purposes for
   which it is offered provided it satisfies all the requirements of
   law for its admissibility therefore.
3. Curative admissibility
   This treats upon the right of the party to introduce incompetent
   evidence in his behalf where the court has admitted the same kind of
   evidence adduced by the adverse party.

Three theories on curative admissibility:

1. American rule – the admission of such incompetent evidence, without
   objection by the opponent does not justify such opponent in rebutting
   it by similar incompetent evidence.
2. English rule – if a party has presented inadmissible evidence, the
   adverse party may resort to similar inadmissible evidence.
3. Massachusetts rule – the adverse party may be permitted to introduce
   similar incompetent evidence in order to avoid a plain and unfair
   prejudice caused by the admission of the other party’s evidence.
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.

The rules prohibit the admission of irrelevant collateral facts only.

Circumstantial evidence is legal evidence and if sufficient, can

sustain a judgment. Circumstantial evidence is evidence of relevant
collateral facts.

Facts Relevant To The Issue

   - are those facts which render the probable existence or
     non-existence of a fact in issue, or some other relevant fact.

The effect of the pleadings is that they help in determining whether

the evidence offered is relevant to the case, for it is a familiar
proposition that the evidence must be confined to the facts put in
issue by the pleadings.

Relevance
   - Evidence has such a relation to the fact in issue as to induce
     belief of its existence or non-existence.
     General rule: Evidence on collateral matters is not allowed.

     Exception: When it tends in any reasonable degree to establish

     the improbability/probability of fact in issue.

Collateral Matters
   – Matters other than the fact in issue and which are offered as a
     basis for inference as to the existence or non-existence of the
     facts in issue.

Evidence may be relevant but immaterial to the case.

Judicial Notice When Mandatory

Judicial Notice – no more than that the court will bring to its aid
and consider, without proof of the facts, its knowledge of those
matters of public concern which are known by all well-informed persons.

                - cognizance of certain facts which judges may take

and act on without proof because they are already known to them.

The object of judicial notice is to save time, labor and expense in

securing and introducing evidence on matters which are not ordinarily
capable of dispute and not actually bonafide disputed, and the tenor
of which can safely be assumed form the tribunal’s general knowledge
or from slight search on its part.

Judicial notice is based on convenience and expediency.

Two kinds of judicial notice

1) Mandatory
2) Discretionary

The direct effect of judicial notice upon the burden of proving a

fact is to relieve the parties from the necessity of introducing
evidence to prove the fact noticed. It makes evidence unnecessary.

The stipulation and admission of the parties or counsel cannot prevail

over the operation of the doctrine of judicial notice, and such
stipulation and admissions are all subject to the operation of the
doctrine.

Municipal trial courts are required to take judicial notice of the

ordinances of the municipality or city wherein they sit.

In the RTC, they must take such judicial notice only

1. when required to do so by statute and
2. in a case on appeal before them and wherein the inferior court
   took judicial notice of an ordinance involved in said case.

Courts are required to take judicial notice of the decisions of

the appellate courts but not of the decisions of coordinate
trial courts.

Judicial Notice When Mandatory

1.  Existence and territorial extent of states

2.  Their political history
3.  Their forms of government
4.  Their symbols of nationality
5.  The law of nations
6.  Admiralty and maritime courts of the world and their seals
7.  Political constitution and history of the Philippines
8.  Official acts of the legislative, executive and judicial
    departments of the Philippines

    Courts cannot take judicial notice of foreign laws.

    (Yao-Kee v. Sy-Gonzales 1988)

    General rule: Courts are not mandated to take judicial notice of

    municipal ordinances. (City of Manila v. Garcia 1967)

    Exception: If the charter of the concerned city provides for such

    judicial notice.

    General rule: Courts cannot take judicial notice of the

    contents/records of other cases even if both cases may have been
    tried or are pending before the same judge.(Prieto v. Arroyo 1965)

    Exception: The case clearly referred to or the original or part

    of the records of the case are actually withdrawn from the archives
    of that case and admitted as part of the record of the case
    pending when:(Tabuena v. CA (1991)
          a) There is no objection from adverse party even with his
             knowledge thereof
          b) It is at the request or with the consent of the parties

9.  Laws of nature;
10. Measure of time;
11. Geographical divisions

Below is a sample Bar Examination question given in 2005 applying

the above mentioned rule.

1. Explain briefly whether the RTC may, motu proprio, take judicial
   notice of: (5%)

   The street name of methamphetamine hydro-chloride is shabu.

   Answer:
   The RTC may motu proprio take judicial notice of the street name
   of methamphetamine hydrochloride is shabu, considering the
   chemical composition of shabu. (People v. Macasling, GM, No.
   90342, May 27,1993)

2. Ordinances approved by municipalities under its territorial

   jurisdiction.

   Answer:
   In the absence of statutory authority, the RTC may not take
   judicial notice of ordinances approved by municipalities under
   their territorial jurisdiction, except on appeal from the
   municipal trial courts, which took judicial notice of the
   ordinance in question. (U.S. v. Blanco, G.R, No. 12435, November
   9,1917; U.S. v. Hernandez, G.R. No. 9699, August 26, 1915)

3. Foreign laws

   Answer:
   The RTC may not generally take judicial notice of foreign laws.
   It must be proved like any matter of fact except in few instances,
   the court in the exercise of its sound judicial discretion, may
   take notice of foreign laws when Philippine courts are evidently
   familiar with them, such as the Spanish Civil Code, which had
   taken effect in the Philippines, and other allied legislation.
   (Pardo v. Republic, G.R. No. L2248 January 23, 1950; Delgado v.
   Republic,G.R. No. L2546, January .28, 1950)

4. Rules and Regulations issued by quasi- judicial bodies implementing

   statutes.

   Answer:
   The RTC may take judicial notice of Rules and Regulations issued
   by quasi-judicial bodies implementing statutes, because they are
   capable of unquestionable demonstration , unless the law itself
   considers such rules as an integral part of the statute, in which
   case judicial notice becomes mandatory.
   (Chattamal v. Collector of Customs, G.R. No.16347, November 3,1920)

5. Rape may be committed even in public places.

   Answer:
   The RTC may take judicial notice of the fact that rape may be
   committed even in public places. The "public setting" of the rape
   is not an indication of consent.
   (People v. Tongson, G.R. No. 91261, February 18, 1991)

   The Supreme Court has taken judicial notice of the fact that a man
   overcome by perversity and beastly passion chooses neither the time,
   place, occasion nor victim.
   (People v, Barcelona, G.R. No. 82589, October 31,1990)

Judicial Notice When Discretionary

When Discretionary
1. Matters of public knowledge
2. Matters capable of unquestionable demonstration
3. Matters which ought to be known to judges because of their
   judicial functions.

The mere personal knowledge of the judge is not the judicial knowledge
of the court.

Judicial cognizance is taken only of those matters which are commonly

known.

It is not essential that matters of judicial cognizance be actually

known to the judge if the subject is proper for judicial knowledge,
the judge may at his discretion, inform himself in any way which may
seem best to him, and act accordingly.

The doctrine of judicial notice rests on the wisdom and discretion of

the courts. The power to take judicial notice is to be exercised by
courts with caution, care must be taken that the requisite notoriety
exists and every reasonable doubt upon the subject should be promptly
resolved in the negative.

Foreign laws may not be taken judicial notice of and have to be proved
like any other fact EXCEPT where said laws are within the actual
knowledge of the court such as when they are well and generally known
or they have been actually ruled upon in other cases before it and
none of the parties claim otherwise.

To prove a written foreign law, the requirements must be complied

with, that is, by an official publication or by a duly attested and
authenticated copy thereof.

Doctrine of Processual Presumption

Absent any of the evidence or admission, the foreign law is presumed
to be the same as that in the Philippines.

Three instances when a Philippine court can take judicial notice of 
a foreign law are:
1. When the Philippine courts are evidently familiar with the
   foreign law
2. When the foreign law refers to the law of nations
   (Sec.1 of Rule 129)
3. When it refers to a published treatise, periodical or pamphlet
   on the subject of law if the court takes judicial notice of the
   fact that the writer thereof is recognized in his profession or
   calling on the subject. (Sec.46,Rule 130)

Judicial Notice When Hearing Necessary

When Hearing is Necessary?

1. During the trial: The court may announce its intention to take judicial notice of any matter and
allow the parties to be heard thereon on its own initiative or on request of a party.
2. After the trial and before judgment or on appeal, The court may announce its intention to take
judicial notice of any matter that is decisive of a material issue in the case and allow the parties to be
heard thereon on its own initiative or on request of a party.

The purpose of the hearing is not for the presentation of evidence but to afford the parties reasonable
opportunity to present information relevant to the proprietary of taking such judicial notice or to the
tenor of the matter to be noticed.

What stage may the court take judicial notice of a fact?

1. During trial
2. after trial and before judgment
3. appeal

A Distinction is made between judicial notice taken during trial and that taken after trial but before
judgment or on appeal.

During the trial

The Court may announce its intention to take judicial notice of any matter and may hear the parties
thereon.

After trial but before judgment or on appeal

The Court may take judicial notice of any matter and allow the parties to be heard thereon if such
matter is decisive of a material issue in the case.

The judge may consult works on collateral science, or arts, touching the topic on trial.

What are the facts that do not need introduction of evidence?

SUGGESTED ANSWER:
a. Facts which a court shall or may take judicial notice. (Secs.1 and 2, Rule 129, ROC)
b. Judicial admissions. (Sec. 4, Rule 129, ROC)
c. Facts which may be presumed from proven facts.

Distinguish mandatory judicial notice from discretionary judicial notice.

SUGGESTED ANSWER:
1. For mandatory judicial notice the court is compelled to take judicial notice because of the use of
the word "shall" in Sec.1, Rule 129, ROC WHILE for discretionary judicial notice the court is not
compelled because of the use of the word "may" in Sec.2, Rule 129, ROC.
2. Mandatory judicial notice takes place at the court's own initiative while discretionary judicial
notice may take place at the court's initiative, or on request of a party.
3. Discretionary judicial notice requires a hearing and presentation of evidence while mandatory
judicial notice does not require hearing and presentation of evidence.

Judicial Admissions

Definition 
Admissions, verbal or written, made by the party in the course of
the proceedings in the same case. It requires no proof.
(Rule 129,Sec.4)
Judicial Admissions
Are those so made in the pleadings filed or in the progress of a trial.

Extrajudicial Admissions
Are those made out of court, or in a judicial proceeding other than
the one under consideration.

Judicial admission may be contradicted only by showing that:

1. It was made through palpable mistake;
2. No such admission was made.

Extrajudicial admissions or other admissions are, as a rule and where

elements of estoppel are not present, disputable.

A judicial admission may be oral as a verbal waiver of proof made in

open court, a withdrawal of a contention or a disclosure made before
the court, or an admission made by a witness in the course of his
testimony or deposition, or may be in writing as in pleading, bill of
particulars, stipulation of facts, request for admission, or a
judicial admission contained in an affidavit used in the case.

To be considered a judicial admission, the admission must be made in

the same case, otherwise, it is an extrajudicial admission.

When a defendant is declared in default for having failed to answer

the complaint, such a failure does not amount to an admission of the
facts alleged in the complaint.

Stipulations voluntarily entered into between the parties will be

respected and enforced by the court unless contrary to public policy
or good morals. However, the binding effect of the facts applies
only to the parties in agreement.
Pleadings superseded or amended disappear from the record of judicial
admissions, and in order that any statements contained therein may
be considered as an extrajudicial admission, it should be offered
formally in evidence.

Torres vs. CA (1984)

An original complaint, after being amended, loses its character as a
judicial admission, which would have required no proof. It becomes
merely an extra-judicial admission requiring a formal offer in order
to be admissible.

Bayas vs. Sandiganbayan

(GR Nos. 143689-91, November 12,2002)
There is nothing irregular or unlawful in stipulating facts in
criminal cases. The policy encouraging it is consistent with the
doctrine of waiver, which recognizes that ". . . everyone has a right
to waive and agree to waive the advantage of a law or rule made solely
for the benefit and protection of the individual in his private
capacity, if it can be dispensed with and relinquished without
infringing on any public right and without detriment to the community
at large."

      In the present case, the Joint Stipulation made by the

prosecution and petitioners was a waiver of the right to present
evidence on the facts and the documents freely admitted by them.

There could have been no impairment of petitioners' right to be presumed

innocent, right to due process or right against self-incrimination
because the waiver was voluntary, made with the assistance of counsel
and is sanctioned by the Rules on Criminal Procedure.
Once the stipulations are reduced into writing and signed by the
parties and their counsels, they become binding on the parties who
made them.

They become judicial admissions of the fact or facts stipulated.

Even if placed at a disadvantageous position, a party may not be
allowed to rescind them unilaterally; it must assume the consequences
of the disadvantage. If the accused are allowed to plead guilty under
appropriate circumstances, by parity of reasoning, they should
likewise be allowed to enter into a fair and true pretrial agreement
under appropriate circumstances.

Object Evidence
   Those addressed to the senses of the court.(Rule 130, Sec.1)
   It includes the anatomy of a person or ofany substance taken
   therefrom.(US v. Tan Teng)

   General rule: When object is relevant to the fact in issue, it may

   be exhibited to, examined or viewed by the court.(Rule 130, Sec.1)

   Exception: Court may refuse introduction of object evidence and

   rely on testimonial alone if:
   1. Its exhibition is contrary to public policy, morals or decency
   2. It would result in delays, inconvenience, unnecessary expenses,
      out of proportion to the evidentiary value of such object
      (People vs.Tavera)
   3. The evidence would be confusing or misleading.(People vs. Saavedra)

Where an object is relevant to a fact in issue, the court may acquire

knowledge thereof by actually viewing the object, in which case such
object becomes object evidence or by receiving testimonial evidence
thereon.
The fact that an ocular inspection has been held does not preclude a
party from introducing other evidence on the same issue.

Whether an ocular inspection is to be made or not lies in the

discretion of the trial court.

An ocular inspection conducted by a judge without notice to or

presence of the parties is invalid as an ocular inspection is a part
of the trial.

The Court May Refuse The Introduction of Object Evidence and Rely on
Testimonial Evidence Alone if:
1. The exhibition of such object is contrary to morals or decency
2. To require its being viewed in court or in an ocular inspection
   would result in delays, inconvenience, unnecessary expenses out
   of proportion to the evidentiary value of such object
3. Such object evidence would be confusing or misleading, as when
   the purpose is to prove the former condition of the object and
   there is no preliminary showing that there has been no substantial
   change in said condition
4. The testimonial or documentary evidence already presented clearly
   portrays the object in question as to render a view thereof
   unnecessary.

Even if the object is repulsive or indecent, if a view of the same

is necessary in the interest of justice, such evidence may still be
exhibited but the court may exclude the public from such view.

Object evidence includes any article or object which may be known

or perceived by the use of any of the senses.
      Example: examination of the anatomy of a person or of any
      substance taken therefrom, or the examination of the
      representative portrayals of the object in question, such as
      maps, diagrams or sketches, pictures or audio-visual recordings,
      provided the same are properly authenticated.

Just like ocular inspection, which are only auxiliary remedies

afforded to the court, such observations of the court may be
amplified by interpretations afforded by testimonial evidence,
especially by experts.

NOTE: Documents are object evidence if the purpose is to prove their

existence or condition, or the nature of the handwriting thereon,
or to determine the age of the paper used, or the blemishes or
alterations thereon, as where falsification is alleged. Otherwise,
they are considered documentary evidence if the purpose is to
establish the contents or tenor thereof.

Object evidence may consist of articles or persons, which may be

exhibited inside or outside the courtroom; it may also be a mere
inspection of an object or an experiment.

Object Evidence
   Is a tangible object that played some actual role on the matter
   that gave rise to the litigation. For instance, a knife.

Demonstrative Evidence
   Is a tangible evidence that merely illustrates a matter of
   importance in the litigation such as maps, diagrams, models,
   summaries and other materials created especially for litigation.

The Distinction between object and demonstrative evidence is

important because it helps determine the standards that the evidence
must meet to be admissible. For Object Evidence, the required
foundation relates to proving that the evidence is indeed the
object used in the underlying event. The foundation for Demonstrative
Evidence, does not involve showing that the object was the one used
in the underlying event, but the foundation generally involves the
showing that the demonstrative object fairly represents or
illustrates what it is alleged to illustrate.

Physical evidence is the highest form of evidence.

Requisites For The Admissibility Of The Object Evidence:

1. Must be relevant to the fact in issue.

         Example: In murder case, the prosecution offered in evidence

         a gun. The gun must have some connection to the crime. There
         must be a logical nexus between the evidence and the point
         on which it is offered.

2. Object must be authenticated before it is admitted. Authentication

   usually consists of showing that the object was involved in
   underlying event.

The “chain of custody” method of authentication requires that every

link in the chain of custody – every person who possessed the object
since it was first recognized as being relevant to the case, must
explain what he did with it.

In order that photographs may be given as evidence, it must be shown

that it is the true and faithful representation of the place or
object which to which they refer. Photographs may be verified by the
photographer or any person acquainted with the object represented and
testify that the same faithfully represents the object.

For tape recordings, the ff. must be shown:

1. The recording device was capable of recording testimony
2. The operator of the device was competent
3. Establishment of the correctness or authenticity of the recording
4. Deletions, additions, changes have not been made
5. Manner of the preservation of the recording
6. Identification of the speakers
7. Testimony elicited was voluntarily made.

Authenticated fingerprints may be compared to fingerprints found on

the crime scene.

Two theories on whether the court may compel the plaintiff to submit
his body for inspection in personal injury cases:
1. No, because the right of a person to be secured of the possession
   or control of his person is sacred.
2. Yes, because if it is not allowed then the court will be an
   instrument of the grossest injustice and therefore the object for
   which courts are instituted would be defeated since the courts will
   be compelled to give a one-sided decision.

   Weight of authority favors the first 2nd theory.

The accused may be compelled to submit himself to an inspection of

his body for the purpose of ascertaining identity or for other
purpose.

There cannot be any compulsion as to the accused taking dictation

from the prosecuting officer for the purpose of determining his
participation in the offense charged.
Whenever the defendant, at the trial of his case, testifying in his
own behalf, denies that a certain writing or signature is in his own
hand he may on cross-examination be compelled to write in open
court in order that the jury may be able to compare his handwriting
with the one in question.

Where the object in question cannot be produced in court because it

is immovable or inconvenient to remove, it is proper for the tribunal
to go to the object in its place and there observe it.

Documentary Evidence

Documentary Evidence
Writings or any material containing letters, words, numbers, figures,
symbols or other modes of written expression offered as proof of their
content.(Rule 130, Sec.2)

Document
Any substance having any matter expressed or described upon it by
marks capable of being read.

NOTE: If it is produced without regard to the message which it

contains, it is treated as real evidence.

Bar Exam Question 1994

Is the photocopy of the marked P100.00 bills used in the “buy-bust”
operation real (object) evidence or documentary evidence?
   Answer: The photocopy of the marked bills is real (object) evidence
   not documentary evidence, because the marked bills are real evidence.

Is the photocopy admissible in evidence?

   Answer: Yes, the photocopy is admissible in evidence, because the
   best evidence rule does not apply to object or real evidence.

Bar Exam Question 2005

May a private document be offered, and admitted in evidence both as
documentary evidence and as object evidence? Explain.
   Answer: Yes, it can be considered as both documentary and object
   evidence.
   A private document may be offered and admitted in evidence both as
   documentary evidence and as object evidence.
   A document can also be considered as an object for purposes of
   the case.
   Objects as evidence are those addressed to the senses of the court.
   (Sec. 1, Rule 130, Rules of Court)
   Documentary evidence consists of writings or any material containing
   letters, words, numbers, figures, symbols or other modes of written
   expressions, offered as proof of their contents.
   (Sec. 2, Rule 130, Rules of Court)
   Hence, a private document may be presented as object evidence in
   order to 'establish certain physical evidence or characteristics
   that are visible on the paper and writings that comprise the
   document.

Original Document Must Be Produced, Exceptions

Best Evidence Rule

General Rule:
The original document must be produced.

      When the subject of inquiry is the contents of a document, no

      evidence shall be admissible other than the original document
      itself.

Exceptions:
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 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
4. When the original is a public record in the custody of a public
   officer or is recorded in a public office

Best Evidence Rule

Is that rule which requires the highest grade of evidence obtainable
to prove a disputed fact.

Purpose of the rule requiring the production of the best evidence:

Is the prevention of fraud because if the best evidence is not
presented then the presumption of suppression of evidence will be
present.

NOTE: Best evidence rule applies only when the purpose of the proof
is to establish the terms of writing.

For the application of the best evidence, it is essential that:

The original writing or if it is a private document, be first duly
identified, and a sufficient and a sufficient foundation be laid,
so as to entitle the writing to be admitted in evidence, and it
must be available to the opposite party for cross-examination.

What is the best evidence rule and how is it applied to documents?

SUGGESTED ANSWER: If, possible, the best evidence which the nature
of the case is susceptible shall always be required, if not available,
then the best evidence that can be had shall be allowed.
(Kneedler v. Paterno, 85 Phil. 183; 20 Am. Jur. 364)
      When the subject of inquiry is the contents of a document no
      evidence shall be admissible other than the original itself.
      (Sec.3, Rule 130)

Reason for rule:

The reason for the best evidence rule is to prevent fraud.
(Anglo-American, etc., v. Cannon, 31 Fed. 314).
The best evidence rule is a misnomer because it merely requires the
best evidence that is available, and if not available, secondary
evidence shall be allowed.

Application of best evidence rule:

The best evidence rule applies only to contents of a writing, when
those contents are the facts in issue, and not to its execution which
may be proved by parol testimony or extrinsic papers.
(Hernaez v. Mcgarth, 90 Phil. 565)

Bar Exam 1997

Give the reasons underlying the adoption of the following rules of
evidence:
c) Best Evidence Rule
   SUGGESTED ANSWER: This Rule is adopted for the prevention of fraud
   and is declared to be essential to the pure administration of
   justice. (Moran,Vol. 5, p. 12.)
   If a party is in possession of such evidence and withholds it,
   the presumption naturally arises that the better evidence is
   withheld for fraudulent purposes.
   (Francisco. Rules of Court, vol. VII. Part I,pp, 121,122)

Bar Exam 1997

When A loaned a sum of money to B. A typed a single copy of the
promissory note, which they both signed. A made two photo (xeroxed)
copies of the promissory note, giving one copy to B and retaining the
other copy. A entrusted the typewritten copy to his counsel for
safekeeping. The copy with A's counsel was destroyed when the law
office was burned.
a) In an action to collect on the promissory note, which is deemed to
   be the "original" copy for the purpose of the "Best Evidence Rule"?
b) Can the photocopies in the hands of the parties be considered
   "duplicate original copies"?
c) As counsel for A, how will you prove the loan given to A and B?

SUGGESTED ANSWER:
a) The copy that was signed and lost is the only "original" copy for
   purposes of the Best Evidence Rule. (Sec. 4 [b] of Rule 130).
b) No, They are not duplicate original copies because there are
   photocopies which were not signed (Mahilum v.Court of Appeals, 17
   SCRA 482),
   They constitute secondary evidence. (Sec. 5 of Rule 130).
c) The loan given by A to B may be proved by secondary evidence through
   the xeroxed copies of the promissory note. The rules provide that
   when the original document is lost or destroyed, or cannot be
   produced in court, the offerer, 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. (Sec. 5 of Rule 130).
Original Document

What is an original document?

1. The original of a document is one in two the contents of which are
   the subject of inquiry.
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.
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 entries are likewise equally regarded as originals.

Document - is a deed, instrument or other duly authorized appear by

which something is proved, evidenced or set forth.

Documentary evidence is that which is furnished by written instruments,

inscriptions and documents of all kinds.

Rule of Exclusion: that which is secondary evidence cannot inceptively

be introduced as the original writing itself must be produced in court,
except in the four instances mentioned in Section 3.

The non-production of the original document unless justified in

Section 3, gives rise to the presumption of suppression of evidence.

In the case of real evidence, secondary evidence of the fact in issue

may readily be introduced without having to account for the
non-production of such primary evidence.

With respect to documentary evidence, the best evidence rule applies

only when the content of such document is the subject of inquiry.

If carbon copies are signed, they are considered as originals.

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, the original itself must be presented.
Affidavits and depositions are considered as not being the best
evidence, hence not admissible if the affiants or deponents are
available as witness.

If the issue is the contents of the telegram as received by the

addressee, then the original dispatch received is the best evidence
and on the issue as to the telegram sent by the sender, the original
is the message delivered for transmission. If the issue is the
inaccuracy of transmission, both telegrams as sent and received
are originals.

General Rule: An objection by the party against whom secondary

evidence is sought to be introduced is essential to bring the best
evidence rule into application. Where secondary evidence has been
admitted, the rule of evidence might have been successfully invoked
if proper and timely objection had been taken.

When a duplicate or a copy is amended or altered by the party, it

becomes the original.

Blueprints and vellum tracings have been held to be originals rather

than copies.

Photocopies are not originals since they are reproduced at a latter

time.

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 regarded as originals.

An electronic document shall be regarded as the equivalent of an

original document under the Best Evidence Rule if it is a printout
or output readable by sight or other means, shown to reflect the
data accurately.

Bar Exam Question 2003

a) State the rule on the admissibility of an electronic evidence.
b) When is an electronic evidence regarded as being the equivalent
   of an original document under the Best Evidence Rule?

SUGGESTED ANSWER:
a) Whenever a rule of evidence refers to the term writing, document,
   record, instrument, memorandum or any other form of writing, such
   term shall be deemed to include an electronic document as defined
   in these Rules.
   An electronic document is admissible in evidence if it complies
   with the rules on admissibility prescribed by the Rules of Court
   and related laws and is authenticated in the manner prescribed    
   by these Rules. (Sec.2 of Rule 3)
   The authenticity of any private electronic document must be
   proved by evidence that it had been digitally signed and other
   appropriate security measures have been applied.

b) An electronic document shall be regarded as the equivalent of an

   original document under the Best Evidence Rule if it is a printout
   or output readable by sight or other means, shown to reflect the
   data accurately.
When Original Document Is Unavailable

Secondary Evidence
Shows that better or primary evidence exists as to the proof of fact
in question. It is deemed less reliable.

When Secondary Evidence May Be Introduced?

1. Original document is unavailable (lost, destroyed or cannot be
   produced in court)
2. Original document is in adverse party’s custody/control.
3. Original document is a public record.

What Must Be Proved To Admit Secondary Evidence?

1. The 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.

The Due Execution Can Be Proved Through The Testimony Of Either:

1. The person who executed it
2. The person before whom its execution was acknowledged
3. Any person who was present and saw it executed and delivered or
   who thereafter saw it and recognized the signatures, or one
   to whom the parties thereto had previously confessed the execution
   thereof.

Intentional destruction of the originals by a party who, however, had

acted in good faith does not preclude his introduction of secondary
evidence of the contents thereof.
When the original is outside the jurisdiction of the court, as when
it is in a foreign country, secondary evidence is admissible.

Secondary evidence may consist of (in the same order):

1. A copy of said document
2. Recital of its contents in an authentic document
3. The recollection of the witnesses

Where the law specifically provides for the class and quantum of
secondary evidence to establish the contents of a document, such
requirement is controlling.

It is not necessary to prove the loss beyond all possibility of

mistake. A reasonable probability of its loss is sufficient, and this
may be shown by bona fide and diligent search for it in place where
it is likely to be found.

Where both parties admit that an instrument has been lost, it is

sufficient to warrant the reception of secondary evidence.

The fact of loss or destruction must, like any other fact, be proved
by a fair preponderance of evidence, and this is sufficient.

The fact that a writing is really a true copy of the original may be
shown by the testimony of a person who has had the opportunity to
compare the copy with the original and found it to be correct. In
order that the testimony of such person may be admissible, it is
sufficient that the original was read to him by another person while
he read the copy and found that it corresponded with what was read
to him. It is also sufficient where the person who made the original
a short time thereafter made a copy by writing down the dictation of
another reading from the original.

As long as the originals of a public document in the possession of

the parties have been proven lost, a certified copy of the document
made before it was lost is admissible as secondary evidence of its
contents, and the burden of proof is upon the party questioning its
authenticity to show that it is not a true copy of the original.

In proving the contents of the original in some authentic document,

it is sufficient if it appears in a private document which is proved
to be authentic. “Authentic” means that the document should be
genuine. It need not be a public document.
It is not expected of a witness to state the contents of a document
with verbal accuracy, it is enough that the substance of the documents
be stated.
When Original Document Is In Adverse
Party’s Custody Or Control

If after reasonable notice is given to the adverse party to produce

the document and after satisfactory proof of the existence of the
document is made, he fails to produce the document, secondary
evidence may be presented.

Facts Which Must Be Shown By The Party Offering Secondary Evidence:

1. The adverse party’s custody or control of the original document
2. That reasonable notice was given to the adverse party who has the
   custody or control of the document
3. Satisfactory proof of its existence
4. Failure or refusal by the adverse party to produce it in court.

No particular form of notice is required, as long as it fairly

apprises the other party as to what papers are desired.

Even an oral demand in open court for production at a reasonable time

thereafter will suffice.

Notice must be given to the adverse party, or his attorney, even if

the document is in the actual possession of a third party.

Where receipt of the original of a letter is acknowledge on a carbon

copy thereof, there is no need for a notice to the other party to
produce the original of the latter.

It should be observed that the duplicate copy, if complete, is itself

an original copy and the only point in issue is the receipt of the
basic original copy thereof.

The justified refusal or failure of the adverse party to produce the

document does not give rise to the presumption of suppression of
evidence or create an unfavorable inference against him. It
authorizes the introduction of secondary evidence.

Under this rule, the production of the original document is procured

by mere notice to adverse party and the requirements for such notice
must be complied with as a condition precedent for the subsequent
introduction of secondary evidence by the proponent.

Where the nature of the action is in itself a notice, as where it is

for the recovery or annulment of documents wrongfully obtained or
withheld by the other party, no notice to produce said document is
required.
Evidence Admissible When Original
Documents Is A Public Record

Its contents may be proved by a certified copy issued by the public

officer in custody thereof.

Such document may be evidenced by an official publication thereof or

by a copy attested by the officer having the legal custody of the
record, and in case of an authorized public record of a private
writing, the same may also be proved by a copy thereof attested by
the legal keeper of the record.

Procedure for proving the contents of original in the custody of

a public officer:
1. When the original of a document
2. Is in the custody of a public officer or
3. Is recorded in a public office
4. Its contents may be proved
   a. By a certified copy
   b. Issued by the public officer
   c. In custody thereof. (Sec. 7  Rule 130)
Party Who Calls For Document Not Bound To Offer It

Production of papers or documents upon the trial, pursuant to a

notice duly served, does not make such papers or documents evidence.
It is not until the party who demanded the production of the papers
examine them and offers them in evidence that they assume the status
of evidentiary matter.

A party who calls for the production of a document and inspects it

is not obliged to offer it as evidence.(Rule 130,Sec.8)
Parol Evidence Rule
Evidence of Written Agreements

Parol Evidence:
Any evidence aliunde, whether oral or written, which is intended or
tends to vary or contradict a complete and enforceable agreement
embodied in a document.

General Rule:
When the terms of an agreement have been reduced to writing, it is to
be 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.

Exception:
A Party may present evidence to modify, explain or add to the terms
of the written agreement if he puts in issue in his pleading any of
the following:
   a. An intrinsic ambiguity, mistake or imperfection in the written
      agreement
   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
   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.

The parol evidence rule is based upon the consideration that when
the parties have reduced their agreement on a particular matter
into writing, all their previous and contemporaneous agreements on
the matter are merged therein, hence evidence of a prior or
contemporaneous verbal agreement is generally not admissible to
vary, contradict, or defeat the operation of a valid document.

Formerly, even if there was a written agreement on a particular

subject matter, the parol evidence rule did not apply to or bar
evidence of a collateral agreement between the same parties on the
same or related subject matter, in the ff instances:
1. Where the collateral agreement is not inconsistent with the
   terms of the written contract
2. Where the collateral agreement has not been integrated in and is
   independent of the written contract as where it is suppletory to
   the original contract
3. Where the collateral agreement is subsequent to or novatory of
   the written contract
4. Where the collateral agreement constitutes a condition precedent
   which determines whether the written contract may become operative
   or effective, but this exception shall not apply to a condition
   subsequent not stated in the agreement

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 to the written
instrument in question and does not base a claim or assert a right
originating in the instrument or the relation established thereby.

PNB vs. Seeto 1952

The Parol Evidence Rule does not apply to collateral agreements.

Pioneer Savings vs. CA

The rule does not apply to exclude evidence of conditions subsequent
in a deed of sale where such conditions were not stated in the
agreement.

Woodhouse vs. Halili 1953

It also does not apply if the issue revolves around fraud and false
representation since they are incidental to the execution and not
to the integration.

Lechugas vs. CA 1986

It does not apply either when 3rd parties are involved.

Ortañez v. CA 1997
The exceptions to the Parol Evidence Rule must be squarely put
in issue.

1997 Bar Examination

Give the reasons underlying the adoption of the following rules of
evidence:
a) Dead Man Rule
b) Parol Evidence Rule
c) Best Evidence Rule
d) The rule against the admission of illegally obtained extrajudicial
    confession
e) The rule against the admission of an offer of compromise in civil
    cases

    Suggested Answer:
    b) Parol Evidence Rule
       It is designed to give certainty to a transaction which has
       been reduced to writing, because written evidence is much
       more certain and accurate than that which rests on fleeting
       memory only.

2001 Bar Examination

Pedro filed a complaint against Lucio for the recovery of a sum of
money based on a promissory note executed by Lucio. In his complaint,
Pedro alleged that although the promissory note says that it is
payable within 120 days, the truth is that the note is payable
immediately after 90 days but that if Pedro is willing, he may, upon
request of Lucio give the latter up to 120 days to pay the note.
During the hearing, Pedro testified that the truth is that the
agreement between him and Lucio is for the latter to pay immediately
after ninety day’s time. Also, since the original note was with Lucio
and the latter would not surrender to Pedro the original note which
Lucio kept in a place about one day’s trip from where he received the
notice to produce the note and in spite of such notice to produce the
same within six hours from receipt of such notice, Lucio failed to do
so. Pedro presented a copy of the note which was executed at the same
time as the original and with identical contents.

      a) Over the objection of Lucio, will Pedro be allowed to

         testify as to the true agreement or contents of the
         promissory note? Why? (2%)

      b) Over the objection of Lucio, can Pedro present a copy of the

         promissory note and have it admitted as valid evidence in his
         favor? Why? (3%)
      Suggested Answers:
      a) Yes, because Pedro has alleged in his complaint that the
         promissory note does not express the true intent and
         agreement of the parties. This is an exception to the parol
         evidence rule.

      b) Yes, the copy in the possession of Pedro is a duplicate

         original and with identical contents. [Sec. 4(b) of Rule 130.
         Moreover, the failure of Lucio to produce the original of
         the note is excusable because he was not given reasonable
         notice, as requirement under the Rules before secondary
         evidence may be presented.
Interpretation of a Writing According to its legal Meaning

The language of a writing is to be interpreted according to the legal

meaning it bears in the place of the execution unless the parties
intended otherwise.

Rules on Interpretation of Documents

1. Interpretation of a writing according to the legal meaning it
   bears in the place of execution, unless parties intended otherwise.
   (Rule 130, Sec.10)
2. Instrument construed so as to give effect to all provisions.
   (Rule 130,Sec.11)
3. Parties intention is to be pursued in construction of instrument.
   In the inconsistency between general and particular provision,
   the latter prevails. Particular intent controls general one
   inconsistent with it.(Rule 130, Sec.12)
4. The circumstances under which an instrument was made, including
   the situation of the subject thereof and of the parties to it,
   may be shown, so that the judge may be placed in the position of
   those whose language he is to interpret.(Rule 130,Sec.13)
5. The terms of a writing are presumed to have been used in their
   primary and general acceptation, but evidence is admissible to
   show that they have a local/technical/peculiar signification and
   were so used and understood in the particular instance, in which
   case the agreement must be construed accordingly.(Rule 130,Sec.14)
6. When there is inconsistency between written words and printed
   words, the former controls over the latter.(Rule 130,Sec.14)
7. Experts and interpreters to be used in explaining writings that
   are difficult to be deciphered, or where the language is not
   understood by the court.(Rule 130,Sec.16)
8. When the terms of an agreement have been intended in a different
   sense by the different parties to it, that sense is to prevail
   against either party in which he supposed the other understood
   it. And when different constructions of a provision are otherwise
   equally proper, that is to be taken which is the most favorable
   to the party in whose favor the provision is made.(Rule 130,Sec.17)
9. Construction in favor of natural right.(Rule 130,Sec.18)
10.Interpretation according to usage to determine instrument’s true
   character.(Rule 130,Sec.19)
Interpretation of a Writing According to its legal Meaning

The language of a writing is to be interpreted according to the legal

meaning it bears in the place of the execution unless the parties
intended otherwise.

Rules on Interpretation of Documents

1. Interpretation of a writing according to the legal meaning it
   bears in the place of execution, unless parties intended otherwise.
   (Rule 130, Sec.10)
2. Instrument construed so as to give effect to all provisions.
   (Rule 130,Sec.11)
3. Parties intention is to be pursued in construction of instrument.
   In the inconsistency between general and particular provision,
   the latter prevails. Particular intent controls general one
   inconsistent with it.(Rule 130, Sec.12)
4. The circumstances under which an instrument was made, including
   the situation of the subject thereof and of the parties to it,
   may be shown, so that the judge may be placed in the position of
   those whose language he is to interpret.(Rule 130,Sec.13)
5. The terms of a writing are presumed to have been used in their
   primary and general acceptation, but evidence is admissible to
   show that they have a local/technical/peculiar signification and
   were so used and understood in the particular instance, in which
   case the agreement must be construed accordingly.(Rule 130,Sec.14)
6. When there is inconsistency between written words and printed
   words, the former controls over the latter.(Rule 130,Sec.14)
7. Experts and interpreters to be used in explaining writings that
   are difficult to be deciphered, or where the language is not
   understood by the court.(Rule 130,Sec.16)
8. When the terms of an agreement have been intended in a different
   sense by the different parties to it, that sense is to prevail
   against either party in which he supposed the other understood
   it. And when different constructions of a provision are otherwise
   equally proper, that is to be taken which is the most favorable
   to the party in whose favor the provision is made.(Rule 130,Sec.17)
9. Construction in favor of natural right.(Rule 130,Sec.18)
10.Interpretation according to usage to determine instrument’s true
   character.(Rule 130,Sec.19)
Interpretation of a Writing According to its legal Meaning

The language of a writing is to be interpreted according to the legal

meaning it bears in the place of the execution unless the parties
intended otherwise.

Rules on Interpretation of Documents

1. Interpretation of a writing according to the legal meaning it
   bears in the place of execution, unless parties intended otherwise.
   (Rule 130, Sec.10)
2. Instrument construed so as to give effect to all provisions.
   (Rule 130,Sec.11)
3. Parties intention is to be pursued in construction of instrument.
   In the inconsistency between general and particular provision,
   the latter prevails. Particular intent controls general one
   inconsistent with it.(Rule 130, Sec.12)
4. The circumstances under which an instrument was made, including
   the situation of the subject thereof and of the parties to it,
   may be shown, so that the judge may be placed in the position of
   those whose language he is to interpret.(Rule 130,Sec.13)
5. The terms of a writing are presumed to have been used in their
   primary and general acceptation, but evidence is admissible to
   show that they have a local/technical/peculiar signification and
   were so used and understood in the particular instance, in which
   case the agreement must be construed accordingly.(Rule 130,Sec.14)
6. When there is inconsistency between written words and printed
   words, the former controls over the latter.(Rule 130,Sec.14)
7. Experts and interpreters to be used in explaining writings that
   are difficult to be deciphered, or where the language is not
   understood by the court.(Rule 130,Sec.16)
8. When the terms of an agreement have been intended in a different
   sense by the different parties to it, that sense is to prevail
   against either party in which he supposed the other understood
   it. And when different constructions of a provision are otherwise
   equally proper, that is to be taken which is the most favorable
   to the party in whose favor the provision is made.(Rule 130,Sec.17)
9. Construction in favor of natural right.(Rule 130,Sec.18)
10.Interpretation according to usage to determine instrument’s true
   character.(Rule 130,Sec.19)