Evidence 2

EVIDENCE
(A.M. NO: 19-08-15-SC)12

RULE 128
GENERAL PROVISIONS
Section 1. Evidence defined.
Evidence is the means, sanctioned by these [R]ules,
of ascertaining in a judicial proceeding the truth
respecting a matter of fact. (1)
Rule 128- general provisions EVIDENCE

Evidence Defined
1. Means of ascertainment – includes not only the procedure or
manner of ascertainment but also the evidentiary fact from which the
truth respecting a matter of fact may be ascertained
2. Sanctioned by the rules – not excluded by the Rules of Court
3. In a judicial proceeding – contemplates an action or proceeding
filed in a court of law
4. The truth respecting a matter of fact – refers to an issue of fact and
is both substantive (determines the facts needed to be established)
and procedural (governs the manner of proving said facts).

Section 2. 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 [R]ules. (2)

Scope of Evidence
It does not apply to election cases, land registration,
cadastral, naturalization and insolvency proceedings,
and other cases, except by analogy or in suppletory
character and whenever practicable and convenient.
(Sec. 4, Rule 1, Rules of Court)

Section 3. Admissibility of evidence.
Evidence is admissible when it is relevant to the issue
and not excluded by the Constitution, the law or
these Rules.

Admissibility vs. Probative Value
Question of whether Question of whether the
certain pieces of evidence admitted evidence proves
are to be considered at all. an issue.

Proof vs. Evidence
Proof Evidence
Result or effect of Mode and manner of
evidence proving competent
facts in judicial
proceedings
The end result The means to an end

Factum Probans vs. Factum
Probandum
Factum Probans Factum Probandum
Evidentiary fact Ultimate fact
Fact by which the factum Fact sought to be established
probandum is to be established
Materials evidencing the Proposition
proposition In civil cases: elements of the
cause of action In criminal cases:
elements of the crime (Prof.
Avena)

Requisites for Admissibility of
Evidence
1. Relevancy – such a relation to the fact in issue as to
induce belief in its existence or non-existence.
2. Competency – if not excluded by Constitution, law
or by the rules.

Doctrine of Fruit of the Poisonous
Tree
The doctrine speaks of that illegally seized
documents, papers, and things are inadmissible in
evidence. The exclusion of such evidence is the only
practical means of enforcing the constitutional
injunction against unreasonable searches and
seizures.


Exclusionary Rules (Constitution)
Evidence arising from violation of Art III, Sec 2
(unreasonable searches and seizure) and Art III, Sec 3
(privacy of communication and correspondence)
results to inadmissibility for any purpose and
proceeding.

Exclusionary Rules (Statutory)
Any communication obtained by a person, not being
authorized by all the parties to any private
communication, by tapping any wire/cable or using
any other device/arrangement to secretly
overhear/intercept/record such information by using
any device, shall not be admissible in evidence in any
hearing or investigation [Secs. 1 and 4, R.A. 4200
(Wire-Tapping Act)

Section 4. Relevancy; collateral
matters.
Evidence must have such a relation to the fact in
issue as to induce belief in its existence or non-
existence. Evidence on collateral matters shall not be
allowed, except when it tends in any reasonable
degree to establish the probability or improbability of
the fact in issue. (4)

Kinds of Admissibility of Evidence
MULTIPLE Evidence that is plainly relevant and competent for two or more purposes
will be received if it satisfies all the requirements prescribed by law in order
that it may be admissible for the purpose for which it is presented, even if it
does not satisfy the other requisites of admissibility for other purposes.
CONDITIONAL Evidence appears to be immaterial is admitted by the court subject to the
condition that its connection with another fact subsequent to be proved
will be established. Otherwise, such fact already received will be stricken off
the record at the initiative of the adverse party.
CURATIVE Evidence that is otherwise improper is admitted (despite objection from the
other party) to contradict improper evidence presented or introduced by
the other party, to cure, contradict or neutralize such improper evidence.

DIRECT AND CIRCUMSTANTIAL
EVIDENCE
DIRECT EVIDENCE CIRCUMSTANTIAL EVIDENCE
Establishes the existence of a fact in Does not prove the existence of a
issue without the aid of any inference fact in issue directly, but merely
or presumption provides for logical inference that
such fact really exists
The witness testifies directly of his Each proof is given of facts and
own knowledge as to the main facts circumstances from which the court
to be proved may infer other connected facts
which reasonably follow, according to
the common experience of mankind

Positive and Negative Evidence
Positive Evidence Negative Evidence
Witness affirms that a Witness states he/she did
certain state of facts did not see or does not know
exist or that a certain of the occurrence of a
event happened. fact
[2 Regalado 703, 2008
Ed.]

Competent and Credible Evidence
Competent Evidence Credible Evidence
Not excluded by the Refers to probative value
Constitution, the law, or or convincing weight
the Rules [Sec. 3, Rule
128

Construction of the Rules of Evidence
The Rules of Court, including the Revised Rules on
Evidence, shall be liberally construed in order to
promote their objective of securing a just, speedy
and inexpensive disposition of every action and
proceeding [Sec. 6, Rule 1]

RULE 129
WHAT NEED NOT BE PROVED
The facts that need not be proved
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).
Rule 129- WHAT NEED NOT BE PROVED EVIDENCE

Section 1. Judicial notice, when
mandatory.
A court shall take judicial notice, without the introduction
of evidence, of the existence and territorial extent of states,
their political history, forms of government and symbols of
nationality, the law of nations, the admiralty and maritime
courts of the world and their seals, the political constitution
and history of the Philippines, official acts of the legislative,
executive and judicial departments of the National
Government of the Philippines, the laws of nature, the
measure of time, and the geographical divisions. (1a)

Judicial Notice Defined
It is the cognizance of certain facts which judges may properly take
and act upon without proof because they are supposed to be known
to them. It is based on considerations of expediency and
convenience. It displaces evidence, being equivalent to proof.
Note: Judicial notice fulfils the objective which the evidence intends
to achieve. It is not equivalent to judicial knowledge or that which is
based on the personal knowledge of the court; rather, it is the
cognizance of “common knowledge.” Judicial notice relieves the
parties from the necessity of introducing evidence to prove the fact
notified. It makes evidence unnecessary.

Judicial Notice (Mandatory)
1. Existence and territorial extent of States;
2. Political history, forms of government and symbols of nationality;
3. Law of nations;
4. Admiralty and maritime courts of the world and their seals;
5. Political constitution and history of the Philippines;
6. Official acts of legislative, executive and judicial departments of the Philippines;
7. Laws of nature;
8. Measure of time; and
9. Geographical divisions

discretionary.
A court may take judicial notice of matters which are
of public knowledge, or are capable of
unquestionable demonstration, or ought to be
known to judges because of their judicial functions.

Judicial Notice (Discretionary)
1. Of public knowledge;
2. Capable of unquestionable demonstration; or
3. Ought to be known to judges because of their
judicial functions

Requisites of judicial notice
1. The matter must be one of common and general knowledge;
2. It must be well and authoritatively settled and not doubtful or
uncertain; and
3. It must be one which is not subject to a reasonable dispute in that it is
either:
a. Generally known within the territorial jurisdiction of the trial court; or
b. Capable of accurate and ready determination by resorting to sources
whose accuracy cannot reasonably be questionable (Expertravel & Tours,
Inc. v. CA, G.R. No. 152392, May 26, 2005).

Matters of Common Knowledge
They are those matters coming to the knowledge of men generally in the course
of ordinary experiences of life, or they may be matters which are generally
accepted by mankind as true and are capable of ready and unquestioned
demonstration.
Note: Thus, facts which are universally known, and which may be found in
encyclopedias, dictionaries or other publications, are judicially noticed,
provided, they are of such universal notoriety and so generally understood that
they may be regarded as forming part of the common knowledge of every
person. A court however cannot take judicial notice of any fact which, in part, is
dependent on the existence or non-existence of a fact of which the court has no
constructive knowledge (Expertravel & Tours, Inc. v. CA, G.R. No. 152392, May
26, 2005).

hearing necessary.
During the pre-trial and the trial, the court, motu
proprio or upon motion, shall hear the parties on the
propriety of taking judicial notice of any matter.
Before judgment or on appeal, the court, motu
proprio or upon motion, may take judicial notice of
any matter and shall hear the parties thereon if such
matter is decisive of a material issue in the case.

Judicial notice, when hearing
necessary.
During Trial After Trial but Before Judgment
or Appeal
The court on its own initiative, The proper court, on its own
or on request of a party, may initiative or on request of a
announce its intention party, may take judicial notice
of any
to take judicial notice of any matter and allow the parties to
matter and allow the parties to be heard thereon if such
be heard thereon (Sec. 3). matter is decisive of a material
issue in the case.

Section 4. Judicial admissions.
An admission, oral or written, made by [the] party in
the course of the proceedings in the same case, does
not require proof. The admission may be
contradicted only by showing that it was made
through palpable mistake or that the imputed
admission was not, in fact, made.

Judicial Admission Defined
It is an admission, verbal or written, made by a party
in the course of the proceedings in the same case,
which does not require proof.

Elements of judicial admission
1. It must be made by a party to the case or his
counsel;
2. It must be made in the course of the proceedings
in the same case; and
3. It can be verbal or written admission. There is no
particular form required.

Judicial admission vs. Extrajudicial
admission.
JUDICIAL ADMISSIONS EXTRAJUDICIAL ADMISSIONS
Those made in the course of the proceeding in the Those made out of court or in a judicial proceeding
same case other than the one under consideration
Do not require proof and may be contradicted only Regarded as evidence and must be offered as such,
by showing that it was made through palpable otherwise the court will not consider it in deciding
mistake or that no such admission was made. the case.
Judicial admissions need not be offered in evidence Requires formal offer for it to be considered
since it is not evidence. It is superior to evidence and
shall be considered by the court as established.
Conclusive upon the admitter Rebuttable
Admissible even if self-serving Not admissible if self-serving
Subject to cross-examination Not subject to cross-examination

EFFECT OF JUDICIAL
ADMISSIONS
1. A party who judicially admits a fact cannot later
challenge that fact as judicial admissions constitute
waiver of proof; production of evidence is dispensed
with;
2. No evidence is needed to prove a judicial admission
and it cannot be contradicted unless it is shown to have
been made through palpable mistake or that no such
admission was made.

How Judicial Admissions May be
Contradicted
1. That it was made through palpable mistake;
2. That no such admission was made (Sec. 4); or
3. To prevent manifest injustice (e.g. pre-trial in civil
cases, Sec. 7, Rule 18).

Mandatory Judicial Notice and
Discretionary Judicial Notice
Mandatory Discretionary
Court is compelled to Court not compelled
take judicial notice
By own initiative of the At the court’s own
court initiative or on request of
any of the parties
No hearing Hearing required

RULE 130
RULES OF ADMISSIBILITY
RULE 130 RULES OF
ADMISSIBILITY
Section 1. Object as evidence. – Objects as evidence
are those addressed to the senses of the court. When
an object is relevant to the fact in issue, it may be
exhibited to, examined or viewed by the court. (1)
Rule 130-Rules of admissibility EVIDENCE

OBJECT (REAL) EVIDENCE
Objects as evidence are those addressed to the senses of the
court. When an object is relevant to the fact in issue, it may be
exhibited to, examined or viewed by the court. (Rule 130, Sec. 1)
It refers to the real thing itself and it consists of tangible things,
not merely perceptions of the witness and a recollection of those
perceptions.
Object evidence is not visual alone. It covers the entire range of
human senses: hearing, taste, smell, and touch. (Riano p. 116)

Requisites for Admissibility
a. Evidence must be relevant;
b. Evidence must be authenticated by a
competent witness;
c. Object must be formally offered [Sec. 34,
Rule 132]

RELEVANT
General rule: When an object is relevant to the fact in issue, it may be exhibited
to, examined or viewed by the court
Exceptions: Court may refuse exhibition of object evidence and rely on
testimonial evidence alone if—
◦ a. Exhibition is contrary to public policy, morals or decency;
◦ b. It would result in delays, inconvenience, unnecessary expenses out of proportion
to the evidentiary value of such object; [People v. Tavera, G.R. No. L-23172 (1925)]
◦ c. Evidence would be confusing or misleading;
◦ d. The testimonial or documentary evidence already presented clearly portrays the
object in question as to render a view thereof unnecessary.
Rule 130-Rules of admissibility (object evidence) EVIDENCE

COMPETENT AND
AUTHENTICATED
Evidence must be authenticated
To authenticate the object is to show that the object is the very
thing that is either the subject matter of the lawsuit or the very
one involved to prove an issue in the case.
Authentication must be made by a competent witness The
witness must have the capacity to identify the object as the very
thing involved in the litigation. A witness can testify only to
those facts which he/she knows of his/her personal knowledge;
that is, which are derived from his/her own perception

Categories of Object Evidence
a. Actual physical or “autopic” evidence
◦ those which have a direct relation or part in the fact or incident
sought to be proven and those brought to the court for
personal examination by the presiding magistrate
b. Demonstrative Evidence
◦ Those which represent the actual or physical object (or event in
case of pictures or videos) being offered to support or draw an
inference or to aid in comprehending the verbal testimony of a
witness. [People v. Olarte, G.R. No. 233209 (2019)

Categories of Object Evidence
Unique Objects that have readily E. .g., gun with a serial
objects identifiable marks; or Exhibit number Car with a dent
identifiable visual or physical on its left bumper
peculiaritie
Objects made Objects with no unique E.g.,sachet of shabu with
Unique characteristic but are made readily initials of the police
identifiable by law enforcers upon officer who retrieved it
retrieval or confiscation
Non-unique Objects with no identifying marks E. .g., narcotic
objects and cannot be marked substances, bodily fluids

Chain Of Custody In Relation To Sec 21 Of The
Comprehensive Dangerous Drugs Act Of 2002
“Chain of Custody” means the duly recorded
authorized movements and custody of seized drugs or
controlled chemicals or plant sources of dangerous
drugs or laboratory equipment of each stage, from
the time of seizure/confiscation to receipt in the
forensic laboratory to safekeeping to presentation in
court for destruction. [Sec. 1(b), Dangerous Drugs
Board Resolution No. 1 (2002)]

Chain Of Custody In Relation To Sec 21 Of The
Comprehensive Dangerous Drugs Act Of 2002
As a general rule, four links in the chain of custody of the confiscated item
must be established:
a. first, the seizure and marking, if practicable, of the illegal drug recovered
from the accused by the apprehending officer;
b. second, the turnover of the illegal drug seized by the apprehending officer
to the investigating officer;
c. third, the turnover by the investigating officer of the illegal drug to the
forensic chemist for laboratory examination; and
d. fourth, the turnover and submission of the marked illegal drug seized from
the forensic chemist to the court. [People v. Gayoso, G.R. No. 206590 (2017)

DNA Evidence
When a crime is committed, material is collected from the
scene of the crime or from the victim’s body for the
suspect’s DNA. This is the evidence sample. The evidence
sample is then matched with the reference sample taken
from the suspect and the victim. The purpose of DNA testing
is to ascertain whether an association exists between the
evidence sample and the reference sample. The samples
collected are subjected to various chemical processes to
establish their profile

DNA Evidence
Exclusion Inconclusive Inclusion
The samples are – It is not possible to be sure, based The samples are similar,
different and therefore on the results of the test, whether and could have originated
must have originated the samples have similar DNA types. from the same source. In
from different sources. This might occur for a variety of such a case, the samples
This conclusion is reasons including degradation, are found to be similar, the
absolute and requires no contamination, or failure of some analyst proceeds to
further analysis or aspect of the protocol. Various parts determine the statistical
discussion; of the analysis might then be significance of the similarity
repeated with the same or a different [People v. Vallejo, G.R. No.
sample, to obtain a more conclusive 144656 (2002)]
result;

RULE 130 RULES OF
ADMISSIBILITY
B. DOCUMENTARY EVIDENCE
Section 2. Documentary evidence.
◦ Documents as evidence consist of writings, recordings,
photographs or any material containing letters, words,
sounds, numbers, fi gures, symbols, or their equivalent, or
other modes of written expression off ered as proof of their
contents. Photographs include still pictures, drawings,
stored images, x-ray fi lms, motion pictures or videos. (2a)
Rule 130-Rules of admissibility (Documentary evidence) EVIDENCE

Documentary Evidence
Consist of writings, recordings, photographs, or any material
containing letters, words, sounds, numbers, figures, symbols,
or their equivalent, or other modes of written expressions
offered as proof of their contents. [Sec. 2, Rule 130]
Photographs include still pictures, drawings, stored images,
x-ray films, motion pictures or videos. [Sec. 2, Rule 130]
Note: 2019 Amendments expanded the definition of
documentary evidence.

a. The document must be relevant;
b. The evidence must be authenticated;
c. The document must be authenticated by a
competent witness;
d. The document must be formally offered in evidence
[Riano 132, 2016 Ed.]

RULE 130 RULES OF
ADMISSIBILITY
1. Original Document Rule
Section 3. Original document must be produced; exceptions.
When the subject of inquiry is the contents of a document, writing, recording, photograph or other record, no
evidence is admissible other than the original document itself, except in the following cases:
(a) When the original is lost or destroyed, or cannot be produced in court, without bad faith on the part of the
off eror;
(b) When the original is in the custody or under the control of the party against whom the evidence is offered,
and the latter fails to produce it after reasonable notice, or the original cannot be obtained by local judicial
processes or procedures;
(c) When the original consists of numerous accounts or other documents which cannot be examined in court
without great loss of time and the fact sought to be established from them is only the general result of the
whole; (d) When the original is a public record in the custody of a public officer or is recorded in a public office;
and
(e) When the original is not closely-related to a controlling issue.

RULE 130 RULES OF
ADMISSIBILITY
Section 4. Original of document. –
(a) An “original” of a document is the document itself or any counterpart intended to have the
same eff ect by a person executing or issuing it. An “original” of a photograph includes the negative
or any print therefrom. If data is stored in a computer or similar device, any printout or other
output readable by sight or other means, shown to refl ect the data accurately, is an “original.”
(b) A “duplicate” is a counterpart produced by the same impression as the original, or from the
same matrix, or by means of photography, including enlargements and miniatures, or by mechanical
or electronic re-recording, or by chemical reproduction, or by other equivalent techniques which
accurately reproduce the original
(c) A duplicate is admissible to the same extent as an original unless (1) a genuine question is raised
as to the authenticity of the original, or (2) in the circumstances, it is unjust or inequitable to admit
the duplicate in lieu of the original. (4a)

Original Document Rule
When the subject of inquiry is the contents of a document, writing, recording,
photograph, or other record, no evidence is admissible other than the original
document itself [Sec. 3, Rule 130]
Note: Original document rule is a rule on admissibility (competence). This rule
replaced the Best Evidence Rule.
When Not Applicable
Where the issue is only as to whether such document was actually executed,
or exists, or on the circumstances relevant to or surrounding its execution, the
best evidence rule (now original document rule) does not apply and
testimonial evidence is admissible. Any other substitutionary evidence is
likewise admissible without need for accounting for the original.

Original Document and Duplicate
Original Duplicate
—the document itself or any counterpart counterpart produced by:
intended to have the same effect by a a. the same impression as the original, or
person executing or issuing it. An from the same matrix;
“original” of a photograph includes the b. means of photography, including
negative or any print therefrom. If data is enlargements and miniatures;
stored in a computer or similar device, any c. mechanical or electronic recording;
printout or other output readable by sight d. chemical reproduction; or
or other means, shown to reflect the data e. other equivalent techniques which
accurately, is an “original”. [Sec. 4, Rule accurately reproduce the original.
130] [Sec. 2, Rule 130]
le 130-Rules of admissibility (Documentary evidence) EVIDENCE

Duplicate Document
General Rule:
A duplicate is admissible to the same extent as an original.
Exceptions:
◦ 1. a general question is raised as to the authenticity of the original;
or
◦ 2. in the circumstances, it is unjust or inequitable to admit the
duplicate in lieu of the original. [Sec. 4, Rule 130]
Note: 2019 Amendments made substantial changes to Sec. 4, Rule
130 Carbon copies are deemed duplicate (originals).

RULE 130 RULES OF
ADMISSIBILITY
2. Secondary Evidence Section 5.
When original document is unavailable. – When the original document has been
lost or destroyed, or cannot be produced in court, the off eror, upon proof of its
execution or existence and the cause of its unavailability without bad faith on his
or her part, may prove its contents by a copy, or by recital of its contents in some
authentic document, or by the testimony of witnesses in the order stated. (5a)
Section 6. When original document is in adverse party’s custody or control. – If
the document is in the custody or under the control of the adverse party, he or
she must have reasonable notice to produce it. If after such notice and after
satisfactory proof of its existence, he or she fails to produce the document,
secondary evidence may be presented as in the case of its loss. (6a)

RULE 130 RULES OF
ADMISSIBILITY
Section 7. Summaries. –
When the contents of documents, records, photographs, or numerous accounts are
voluminous and cannot be examined in court without great loss of time, and the fact
sought to be established is only the general result of the whole, the contents of such
evidence may be presented in the form of a chart, summary, or calculation. The
originals shall be available for examination or copying, or both, by the adverse party at
a reasonable time and place. The court may order that they be produced in court. (n)
Section 8. Evidence admissible when original document is a public record. – When
the original of a document is in the custody of a public officer or is recorded in a public
office, its contents may be proved by a certified copy issued by the public offi er in
custody thereof. (7) Section 9. Party who calls for document not bound to off er it. – A
party who calls for the production of a document and inspects the same is not obliged
to offer it as evidence. (8)
Secondary Evidence
The following are the exceptions to the original document rule:
1. When the original is unavailable
2. When the original is in the custody or control of the adverse party OR original cannot
be obtained by local judicial processes or procedures
3. When the contents of documents, records, photographs, or numerous accounts are
voluminous and 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
(“Summaries”)
4. When the original is a public record in the custody of a public officer or is recorded in
a public office
5. When original is outside the jurisdiction of the court

Secondary Evidence
In order that secondary evidence may be admissible, there must be proof
by satisfactory evidence of:
◦ 1. due execution of the original;

◦ 2. loss, destruction, or unavailability of all such originals; and
◦ 3. reasonable diligence and good faith in the search for or attempt to
produce the original
Note: The correct order of proof is existence, execution, loss, and contents.

1. When the original is unavailable
a. When the original has been lost or destroyed, or cannot be produced in
court;
b. Upon proof of its execution or existence and the cause of its
unavailability; and
c. Without bad faith on the offeror’s part
What to present to prove contents (in this order)

◦ a. A copy;
◦ b. A recital of its contents in some authentic document; or
◦ c. The testimony of witnesses

2. When the original is in the custody or
control of the adverse party OR original
cannot be obtained by local judicial processes
or procedure
The following facts must be shown to allow introduction of
secondary evidence:
◦ 1. The document is in the custody or under the control of the
adverse party;
◦ 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 by the adverse party to produce it in court.

3. When the contents of documents, records,
photographs, or numerous accounts are voluminous
and 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
(“Summaries”)
What to present to prove contents Chart, summary, or calculation of
the contents of such evidence The originals shall be available for
examination or copying, or both, by the adverse party at a
reasonable time and place. The court may order that they be
produced in court. [Sec. 7, Rule 130]

4. When the original is a public record in the custody
of a public officer or is recorded in a public office
The contents of the original may be proved by a certified
copy issued by the public officer in custody thereof. (Rule
130, Sec. 8)
When the original is outside of the jurisdiction of the
court, as when it is in a foreign country, secondary
evidence is still admissible (PNB v. Olila, 98 Phil. 1002,
unreported, 1956)

When the original is not closely-
related to a controlling issue.

RULE 130 RULES OF
ADMISSIBILITY
3. Parol Evidence Rule
Section 10. Evidence of written agreements. – When the terms of an agreement have been
reduced to writing, it is considered as containing all the terms agreed upon and there can be, as
between the parties and their successors in interest, no evidence of such terms other than the
contents of the written agreement. However, a party may present evidence to modify, explain or
add to the terms of the written agreement if he or she puts in issue in a verified pleading:
(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; or (d) The existence of other terms agreed to by the
parties or their successors in interest after the execution of the written agreement. The term
“agreement” includes wills. (9a

Parol Evidence Rule
Parol Evidence
Any evidence aliunde (extraneous evidence), whether oral or
written, which is intended or tends to vary or contradict a
complete and enforceable agreement embodied in a
document.
Evidence Aliunde
Extrinsic evidence that may refer to testimonial, real or
documentary evidence

Parol Evidence Rule
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.
The term “agreement” includes wills.

Parol Evidence Rule
Exception: A party may present evidence to modify, explain or add to
the terms of the written agreement if he puts in issue in a verified
pleading any of the following:
1. An intrinsic ambiguity, mistake or imperfection in the written
agreement;
2. The failure of the written agreement to express the true intent and
agreement of the parties thereto;
3. The validity of the written agreement; or
4. The existence of other terms agreed to by the parties or their
successors in interest after the execution of the written agreement.
When Parol Evidence Rule Applies
1. Existence of a valid contract;
2. The terms of the agreement must be in writing.
3. This may refer to either public or private writing;
4. The dispute is between parties and their successors in interest; and/or
5. There is dispute as to the terms of the agreement with the party basing
his claim or asserting a right originating in the instrument or the
relation established thereby.
The parol evidence rule becomes operative when the issues in litigation are
the terms of a written agreement.

Parol Evidence Rule
Intrinsic ambiguity (latent)– writing admits of two
constructions, both of which are in harmony with the
language used
Mistake refers to mistake of fact which is mutual to the
parties
Imperfection includes an inaccurate statement in the
agreement or incompleteness in the writing, or the
presence of inconsistent provisions

Original Document Rule v.
Parol Evidence Rule
Original Document Rule Parol Evidence Rule
Contemplates the situation wherein the original writing Contemplates the situation wherein the original writing
is not available and/or there is a dispute as to whether is not available and/or there is a dispute as to whether
said writing is the original said writing is the original
Prohibits the introduction of substitutionary evidence in Prohibits the introduction of substitutionary evidence in
lieu of the original document regardless of WON it varies lieu of the original document regardless of WON it varies
the contents of the original the contents of the original
Can be invoked by any party to an action regardless of Can be invoked by any party to an action regardless of
WON such party participated in the writing involve WON such party participated in the writing involve
Applies to all kinds of writings, recordings, photographs, Applies to all kinds of writings, recordings, photographs,
or any material containing letters, words, sounds, or any material containing letters, words, sounds,
numbers, figures, symbols, or their equivalent, or other numbers, figures, symbols, or their equivalent, or other
modes of written expression offered as proof of their modes of written expression offered as proof of their
contents contents

Authentication and Proof of
Documents
Meaning of Authentication
Proving that the objects and documents presented in evidence are genuine and what it
purports to be.
Classes of Documents Public Documents
◦ 1. Written official acts or records of the official acts of the sovereign authority, official
bodies and tribunals, and public officers, whether of the Philippines or of a foreign country
◦ 2. Notarial documents (except last wills and testaments)
◦ 3. Documents considered public documents under treaties and conventions which are in
force between the Philippines and the country of source Note: This is a new addition to the
original provision.
◦ 4. Public records, kept in the Philippines, of private documents required by law to be
entered therein

Public Documents
A public document enjoys the presumption of regularity. It is a
prima facie evidence of the truth of the facts stated therein and
a conclusive presumption of its existence and due execution. To
overcome this presumption, there must be clear and convincing
evidence
A public document is self-authenticating and requires no further

authentication in order to be presented as evidence in court.

Private Documents
All other writings are private. [Sec. 20, Rule 130]
A private document is any other writing, deed, or

instrument executed by a private person without the
intervention of a notary or other person legally
authorized by which some disposition or agreement
is proved or set forth

Authentication; Proof of Private
Writing
General rule: Before any private document offered as authentic
is received in evidence, its due execution and authenticity must
be proved [Sec. 20, Rule 132]
How to Prove Due Execution and Authenticity
◦ 1. By anyone who saw the document executed or written
◦ 2. By evidence of the genuineness of the signature or handwriting
of the maker; or
◦ 3. By other evidence showing its due execution and authenticity.
[Sec. 20, Rule 132

Authentication; Proof of Private
Writing
Before a private document is admitted in evidence, it must be
authenticated either by:
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, or
4. who after its execution, saw it and recognized the signatures, or
5. the person to whom the parties to the instruments had
previously confessed execution thereof

When Evidence of Authenticity of a
Private Writing is Not Required
The requirement of authentication of a private document is excused only in four
instances, specifically:
1. when the document is an ancient one which is:
◦ a. More than 30 years old;
◦ b. Produced from a custody in which it would naturally be found if genuine; and
◦ c. Unblemished by any alterations or circumstances of suspicion
2. when the genuineness and authenticity of the actionable document have not
been specifically denied under oath by the adverse party;
3. when the genuineness and authenticity of the document have been admitted; or
4. when the document is not being offered as genuine.

Genuineness of a Handwriting
1. By any witness who believes it to be the handwriting of such person
because:
◦ a. He/she has seen the person write; or
◦ b. He/she has seen writing purporting to be his/hers upon which the
witness has acted or been charged, and has thus acquired knowledge of
the handwriting of such person [Sec. 22, Rule 132]
2. A comparison by the witness or the court of the questioned
handwriting, and admitted genuine specimens thereof or proved to be
genuine to the satisfaction of the judge [Sec. 22, Rule 132] 3. Expert
evidence

Public Documents as Evidence; Proof
of Official Records

Public Documents as Evidence; Proof
of Official Records
Proof of official record referred to in Sec. 19(a), Rule 132
1. By an official publication thereof; or
2. By a copy of the document attested by the officer having legal custody of
the record, or his/her deputy a. If record is not kept in the Philippines:
accompany with a certificate that such officer has the custody
◦ i. If the foreign country is a contracting party to a treaty or convention to which the
Philippines is also a party, or it is considered a public document under the treaty or
convention: certificate or its equivalent shall be in the form prescribed therein, subject to
reciprocity
◦ ii. If not a contracting party: certificate made by a secretary of the embassy or legation,
consul general, consul, vice-consul, or consular agent, or any officer in the foreign service of
the Philippines stationed in the country where the record is kept 1. Must be authenticated
by the seal of his/her office
Attestation of a Copy of a Document
or Record
1. Must state that the copy is a correct copy of the
original or a specific part thereof, as the case may be
2. Must be under the official seal of the attesting
officer, if there be any, or if he/she be the clerk of a
court having a seal, under the seal of such court
[Sec. 25, Rule 132]

Public Record of Private Documents
1. By the original record; or
2. By a copy thereof, attested by the legal custodian
of the record, with an appropriate certificate that
such officer has the custody [Sec. 27, Rule 132]

Proof of Lack of Record
1. Written statement
◦ a. Signed by an officer having the custody of an official record
or by his/her deputy
◦ b. Must state that after diligent search, no record or entry of a
specified tenor is found to exist in the records of his/her office
2. Certificate
◦ a. Accompanying the written statement
◦ b. Must state that that such officer has the custody

RULE 130 RULES OF
ADMISSIBILITY
4. Interpretation of Documents
Section 11. 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 its execution, unless the parties intended otherwise. (10)
Section 12. Instrument construed so as to give effect to all provisions. – In the
construction of an instrument[,] where there are several provisions or particulars,
such a construction is, if possible, to be adopted as will give eff ect to all. (11)
Section 13. Interpretation according to intention; general and particular provisions.
– In the construction of an instrument, the intention of the parties is to be pursued;
and when a general and a particular provision are inconsistent, the latter is
paramount to the former. So a particular intent will control a general one that is
inconsistent with it. (12)

RULE 130 RULES OF
ADMISSIBILITY
Section 14. Interpretation according to circumstances. – For the proper construction
of an instrument, the circumstances under which it 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 or she is to interpret. (13a)
Section 15. Peculiar signification of terms. – 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, or otherwise peculiar signification, and were so
used and understood in the particular instance, in which case the agreement must be
construed accordingly. (14)
Section 16. Written words control printed. – When an instrument consists partly of
written words and partly of a printed form, and the two [(2)] are inconsistent, the
former controls the latter. (15)

RULE 130 RULES OF
ADMISSIBILITY
Section 17. Experts and interpreters to be used in explaining certain writings. – When the characters
in which an instrument is written are diffi cult to be deciphered, or the language is not understood by
the court, the evidence of persons skilled in deciphering the characters, or who understand the
language, is admissible to declare the characters or the meaning of the language. (16)
Section 18. Of two constructions, which preferred. – When the terms of an agreement have been
intended in a diff erent sense by the diff erent parties to it, that sense is to prevail against either party
in which he or she supposed the other understood it, and when diff erent 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 was made. (17a)
Section 19. Construction in favor of natural right. – When an instrument is equally susceptible of two
[(2)] interpretations, one [(1)] in favor of natural right and the other against it, the former is to be
adopted. (18)
Section 20. Interpretation according to usage. – An instrument may be construed according to usage,
in order to determine its true character. (19)

C. TESTIMONIAL
EVIDENCE
1. QUALIFICATION OF WITNESSES
Qualification of Witnesses
Section 21. Witnesses; their qualifications. – All persons who can perceive, and perceiving, can
make known their perception to others, may be witnesses. (20a) Religious or political belief,
interest in the outcome of the case, or conviction of a crime, unless otherwise provided by law,
shall not be a ground for disqualifi cation. (20)
[Section 21. Disqualification by reason of mental incapacity or immaturity. – (Deleted)]
Section 22. Testimony confined to personal knowledge. – A witness can testify only to those facts
which he or she knows of his or her personal knowledge; that is, which are derived from his or her
own perception. (36a)
Section 23. Disqualification by reason of marriage. – During their marriage, the husband or the
wife cannot testify against the other without the consent of the aff ected spouse, except in a civil
case by one against the other, or in a criminal case for a crime committed by one against the other
or the latter’s direct descendants or ascendants. (22a)
Rule 130-Rules of admissibility (TESTIMONIALL EVIDENCE) EVIDENCE

Section 23. Disqualifi cation by reason of marriage. –
During their marriage, the husband or the wife
cannot testify against the other without the consent
of the aff ected spouse, except in a civil case by one
against the other, or in a criminal case for a crime
committed by one against the other or the latter’s
direct descendants or ascendants. (22a)

(b) An attorney or person reasonably believed by the client to be
licensed to engage in the practice of law cannot, without the
consent of the client, be examined as to any communication made
by the client to him or her, or his or her advice given thereon in the
course of, or with a view to, professional employment, nor can an
attorney’s secretary, stenographer, or clerk, or other persons
assisting the attorney be examined without the consent of the
client and his or her employer, concerning any fact the knowledge
of which has been acquired in such capacity, except in the following
cases:

(b) An attorney or person reasonably believed by the client to be
licensed to engage in the practice of law cannot, without the
consent of the client, be examined as to any communication made
by the client to him or her, or his or her advice given thereon in the
course of, or with a view to, professional employment, nor can an
attorney’s secretary, stenographer, or clerk, or other persons
assisting the attorney be examined without the consent of the
client and his or her employer, concerning any fact the knowledge
of which has been acquired in such capacity, except in the following
cases:

(i) Furtherance of crime or fraud. If the services or advice of the lawyer were sought or obtained to
enable or aid anyone to commit or plan to commit what the client knew or reasonably should have
known to be a crime or fraud;
(ii) Claimants through same deceased client. As to a communication relevant to an issue between
parties who claim through the same deceased client, regardless of whether the claims are by testate
or intestate or by inter vivos transaction;
(iii) Breach of duty by lawyer or client. As to a communication relevant to an issue of breach of duty
by the lawyer to his or her client, or by the client to his or her lawyer;
(iv) Document attested by the lawyer. As to a communication relevant to an issue concerning an
attested document to which the lawyer is an attesting witness; or
(v) Joint clients. As to a communication relevant to a matter of common interest between two [(2)] or
more clients if the communication was made by any of them to a lawyer retained or consulted in
common, when offered in an action between any of the clients, unless they have expressly agreed
otherwise.
(c) A physician, psychotherapist or person reasonably believed by the patient to be
authorized to practice medicine or psychotherapy cannot in a civil case, without the
consent of the patient, be examined as to any confidential communication made for
the purpose of diagnosis or treatment of the patient’s physical, mental or emotional
condition, including alcohol or drug addiction, between the patient and his or her
physician or psychotherapist. This privilege also applies to persons, including
members of the patient’s family, who have participated in the diagnosis or treatment
of the patient under the direction of the physician or psychotherapist.
◦ A “psychotherapist” is:
◦ (a) A person licensed to practice medicine engaged in the diagnosis or treatment of a
mental or emotional condition, or
◦ (b) A person licensed as a psychologist by the government while similarly engaged.

(d) A minister, priest or person reasonably believed to be so cannot,
without the consent of the affected person, be examined as to any
communication or confession made to or any advice given by him or
her, in his or her professional character, in the course of discipline
enjoined by the church to which the minister or priest belongs.
(e) A public officer cannot be examined during or after his or her
tenure as to communications made to him or her in official
confidence, when the court finds that the public interest would
suffer by the disclosure.

The communication shall remain privileged, even in
the hands of a third person who may have obtained
the information, provided that the original parties to
the communication took reasonable precaution to
protect its confi dentiality. (24a)

Basic Qualifications of a Witness
a. He/she can perceive
◦ i. Corollary to perception is that the witness must have personal knowledge of
the facts surrounding the subject matter of his testimony [Sec. 22, Rule 130]
b. He/she can make known his perception
◦ i. This means that he/she must have the ability to remember and
communicate the remembered perception
c. He/she must take an oath or affirmation [Sec. 1, Rule 132]
d. He/she must not possess any of the disqualifications

In case person is convicted of a crime
General rule: Not disqualified The fact that a witness has been convicted
of felony is a circumstance to be taken into consideration as affecting his
character and credibility [Enrile, et al. v. Roberto, et al. G.R. No. L-42309
(1935)]
Exception: Otherwise provided by law, e.g. under Art. 821 of the Civil
Code, a person convicted of any of the following crimes cannot be a
witness to a will:
◦ a. Falsification of documents,
◦ b. Perjury; or
◦ c. False testimony

Competency of a Witness
One is qualified to take the witness stand if:
a. He is capable of perceiving at the time of the occurrence of the fact; and
b. He came make his perception known
Competency Presumed
A person who takes the witness stand is presumed to possess the qualifications of a witness. His
competence may be questioned by the other party by interposing an objection.
witness. His competence may be questioned by the other party by interposing an objection.
Credibility of a Witness
Credibility has nothing to do with the law or the rules. It refers to the weight and trustworthiness or
reliability of the testimony. [Riano, 185, 2016 Ed.

Disqualification of Witnesses
EFFECT OF INTEREST IN THE SUBJECT MATTER
A person is not disqualified by reason of his interest in the subject matter.
Interest only affects credibility, not competency.
EFFECT OF RELATIONSHIP
General rule: Mere relationship does not impair credibility [People v. De
Guzman, G.R. 130809 (2000)]
Exception: To warrant rejection, it must be clearly shown that:
a. Testimony was inherently improbable or defective
b. Improper/evil motives had moved the witness to incriminate falsely [People
v. Daen Jr., G.R. No. 112015 (1995)]

a. Disqualification by Reason of
Marriage
Marital Disqualification Rule or Spousal Immunity
Elements
1. During their marriage i. The marriage must be valid and existing at
the time of the offer of the testimony
2. The husband or the wife cannot testify against the other
◦ i. The “other” spouse must be a party to the action, either as a plaintiff
or defendant
◦ ii. Note: 2019 Revision removed the words “for or”
3. Without the consent of the affected spouse [Sec. 23, Rule 130]
Marriage
Except: Spouse may testify against the other even
without the consent of the latter
◦ 1. In a civil case by one against the other; or
◦ 2. In a criminal case for a crime committed by one
against the other or the latter's direct
descendants/ascendants [Sec. 23, Rule 130

Marriage
Rationale
1. There is identity of interests between husband and wife;
2. If one were to testify against the other, there is a consequent
danger of perjury;
3. Policy of the law is to guard the security and confidence of private
life, and to prevent domestic disunion and unhappiness; and
4. Where there is want of domestic tranquility, there is danger of
punishing one spouse through the hostile testimony of the othe

Marriage
Duration
General rule: During their marriage [Sec. 23 Rule 130]
Exception: Where the marital and domestic relations are so
strained that there is no more harmony to be preserved nor peace
and tranquility which may be disturbed, the reason based upon
such harmony and tranquility fails. In such a case, identity of
interests disappears, and the consequent danger of perjury based
on that identity is non-existent [Alvarez v. Ramirez, G.R. No.
143439 (2005)

b. Disqualifications by Reason of Privileged
Communications; Rule on Third Parties
Privilege
A privilege is a rule of law that, to protect a particular relationship
or interest, either permits a witness to refrain from giving
testimony he otherwise could be compelled to give, or permits
someone usually one of the parties, to prevent the witness from
revealing certain information.
Privilege may only be invoked by the persons protected
thereunder. It may also be waived by the same persons, either
impliedly or expressly.

1. Marital Privilege
Rationale
Confidential nature of the privilege; to preserve marital and domestic
relations
Elements
1. The husband or the wife
2. During or after the marriage
3. Cannot be examined
4. Without the consent of the other
5. As to any communication received in confidence by one from the other
during the marriage
Except:
Spouse may testify for or against the other even without the consent of
the latter
1. In a civil case by one against the other, or
2. In a criminal case for a crime committed by one against the other or
the latter’s direct descendants or ascendants.
Scope:
“Any communication” Includes utterances, either oral or written, or acts
[Herrera

When not applicable
1. When the communication was not intended to be kept in confidence
2. When the communication was made prior to the marriage
3. Waiver of the privilege [Herrera]
Waiver
1. Failure of the spouse to object; or
2. Calling spouse as witness on cross examination
3. Any conduct constructed as implied consent

Marital Disqualification vs.
Marital Privilege
Marital Disqualification Marital Privilege
One spouse should be a party to Neither of the spouses need to be
the case; a party;
Applies only if the marriage is Does not cease even after the
existing at the time the testimony marriage is dissolved; and
is offered; and
Constitutes a total prohibition on Prohibition is limited to testimony
any testimony against the spouse on confidential communications
of the witness between spouses

2. Attorney Client Privilege
Communication
Elements
1. Without the consent of his client
2. Cannot be examined as to
◦ a. Any communication made by the client to him/her, or
◦ b. His/her advice given thereon in the course of, or with a view to, professional
employment
Subject-matter of the privilege

1. Communications
2. Observations by the lawyer (regardless of medium of transmission which may
include oral or written words and actions)
3. Tangible evidence delivered to a lawyer 4
4. Documents entrusted to a lawyer
Communication
Exceptions
1. Furtherance of crime or fraud
◦ a. If the services or advice of the lawyer were sought or obtained
◦ b. To enable or aid anyone
◦ c. To commit or plan to commit
◦ d. What the client knew or reasonably should have known to be a crime or fraud
2. Claimants through same deceased client
◦ a. As to communication relevant to an issue between parties who
◦ b. Claim through the same deceased client
◦ c. Regardless of whether the claims are by testate, intestate, or inter vivos
transaction
Communication
Exceptions
3. Breach of duty by lawyer or client
◦ a. As to communications relevant to an issue of breach of duty
◦ i. By the lawyer to his/her client; or
◦ ii. By the client to his/her lawyer
4. Document attested by the lawyer
◦ a. As to communication relevant to an issue concerning an
attested document
◦ b. The lawyer is an attesting witness

Communication
Exceptions
5. Joint clients
◦ a. As to a communication relevant to a matter of common interest between two or
more clients
◦ b. The communication was made by any of them to
◦ c. The lawyer retained or consulted in common
◦ d. Communication is offered in an action between any of the clients
◦ e. Neither expressly agreed otherwise
Duration of the privilege
In the absence of a statute, the privilege is permanent. It may even be claimed by a
client’s executor or administrator after the client’s death

3. Physician and Patient Privilege
Communication
Elements
1. A physician, psychotherapist or person reasonably believed by
the patient to be authorized to practice medicine or
psychotherapy
a. Psychotherapist:
◦ i. Person licensed to practice medicine engaged in the diagnosis or
treatment of a mental or emotional condition; or
◦ ii. A person licensed as a psychologist by the government while
similarly engaged

Communication
Elements
2. In a civil case
a. Note: the privilege cannot be claimed in a criminal case because the interest of the
public in a criminal prosecution should be deemed more important than the secrecy of
the communication
3. Without the consent of the patient
4. Cannot be examined as to
◦ a. Any confidential communication made between the patient and his/her physician or
psychotherapist
◦ b. For the purpose of diagnosis or treatment
◦ i. Of the patient’s physical, mental, or emotional condition
◦ ii. Including drug or alcohol addiction

Communication
Physician allowed to testify as an expert
A doctor is allowed to be an expert witness when he
does not disclose anything obtained in the course of
his examination, interview and treatment of a patient.
Duration of privilege
The privilege survives the death of the patient.

4. Priest and Penitent Privilege
Communication
Elements
1. A minister or priest or person reasonably believed to be so
2. Without the consent of the affected person
3. Cannot be examined as to any
◦ a. communication; or
◦ b. confession made to; or
◦ c. advice given by him/her
4. in his/her professional character
5. in the course of discipline enjoined by the church to which the minister
or priest belongs
5. Public Officer Privilege
Communication
Elements
1. A public officer
2. During or after his/her tenure
3. Cannot be examined as to communications made to
him/her in official confidence
4. When the court finds that the public interest would
suffer by the disclosure

b. Disqualifications by Reason of Privileged
Communications; Rule on Third Parties
Rule on Third Parties
The communication shall remain privileged, even in
the hands of a third person who may have obtained
the information, provided that the original parties to
the communication took reasonable precaution to
protect its confidentiality

C. TESTIMONIAL
EVIDENCE
2. TESTIMONIAL PRIVILEGE
TESTIMONIAL PRIVELEGE
Section 25. Parental and filial privilege. –
No person shall be compelled to testify against his or
her parents, other direct ascendants, children or
other direct descendants, except when such
testimony is indispensable in a crime against that
person or by one parent against the other. (25a)

TESTIMONIAL PRIVELEGE
Section 26. Privilege relating to trade secrets. –
A person cannot be compelled to testify about any trade
secret, unless the non-disclosure will conceal fraud or
otherwise work injustice. When disclosure is directed,
the court shall take such protective measure as the
interest of the owner of the trade secret and of the
parties and the furtherance of justice may require. (n)

Parental and Filial Privilege Rule
General Rule:
No person shall be compelled to testify against his/her
◦ 1. Parents
◦ 2. other direct ascendants
◦ 3. children or
◦ 4. other direct descendants
Exceptions:
Except when such testimony is indispensable in a crime
◦ 1. against that person or
◦ 2. by one parent against the other.

Trade Secrets
General Rule:
A person cannot be compelled to testify about any trade secret
Except: the non-disclosure will conceal fraud or otherwise
work injustice When disclosure is directed, the court shall take
protective measures, as required by
◦ 1. the interests of the owner of the trade secret;
◦ 2. the interests of the parties; and
◦ 3. the furtherance of justice

C. TESTIMONIAL
EVIDENCE
3. ADMISSION AND CONFESSION
ADMISSION AND CONFESSION
Section 27. Admission of a party. –
The act, declaration or omission of a party as to a
relevant fact may be given in evidence against him or
her. (26a)

Section 28. Offer of compromise not admissible. –
In civil cases, an offer of compromise is not an admission of any liability, and
is not admissible in evidence against the offeror. Neither is evidence of conduct
nor statements made in compromise negotiations admissible, except evidence
otherwise discoverable or offered for another purpose, such as proving bias or
prejudice of a witness, negativing a contention of undue delay, or proving an
effort to obstruct a criminal investigation or prosecution.
In criminal cases, except those involving quasi-offenses (criminal negligence)
or those allowed by law to be compromised, an offer of compromise by the
accused may be received in evidence as an implied admission of guilt.

A plea of guilty later withdrawn or an unaccepted offer of a
plea of guilty to a lesser offense is not admissible in evidence
against the accused who made the plea or offer. Neither is any
statement made in the course of plea bargaining with the
prosecution, which does not result in a plea of guilty or which
results in a plea of guilty later withdrawn, admissible.
An offer to pay[,] or the payment of medical, hospital or
other expenses occasioned by an injury[,] is not admissible in
evidence as proof of civil or criminal liability for the injury. (27a)

Section 29. Admission by third party. –
The rights of a party cannot be prejudiced by an act, declaration, or
omission of another, except as hereinafter provided. (28)
Section 30. Admission by co-partner or agent. –
The act or declaration of a partner or agent authorized by the party to
make a statement concerning the subject, or within the scope of his or
her authority[,] and during the existence of the partnership or agency,
may be given in evidence against such party after the partnership or
agency is shown by evidence other than such act or declaration. The
same rule applies to the act or declaration of a joint owner, joint debtor,
or other person jointly interested with the party. (29a
Section 31. Admission by conspirator. –
The act or declaration of a conspirator in furtherance of the conspiracy
and during its existence may be given in evidence against the co-
conspirator after the conspiracy is shown by evidence other than such
act of declaration. (30a)
Section 32. Admission by privies. –
Where one derives title to property from another, the latter’s act,
declaration, or omission, in relation to the property, is evidence
against the former [if done] while the latter was holding the title. (31a)

Section 33. Admission by silence. –
An act or declaration made in the presence and within the hearing or
observation of a party who does or says nothing when the act or
declaration is such as naturally to call for action or comment if not true,
and when proper and possible for him or her to do so, may be given in
evidence against him or her. (32a)
Section 34. Confession. –
The declaration of an accused acknowledging his or her guilt of the
offense charged, or of any offense necessarily included therein, may be
given in evidence against him or her. (33a)

a. Admission by a Party
Elements
1. The act, declaration or omission
2. Of a party
3. As to a relevant fact
4. Against his or her interest [Sec. 27, Rule 130]
5. Made out of court (Those made in court are governed by Sec. 4, Rule
129.) [2 Regalado 754, 2008 Ed.]
6. Offered and presented in court in an admissible manner (e.g. non-
hearsay)

b. Res Inter Alios Acta Rule
“Res inter alios acta alteri nocere non debet”— Things done
between strangers ought not to injure those who are not
parties to them [Black’s Law Dictionary]
Two Branches
1. First branch: Admission by a third party [Sec. 29, Rule 130]
2. Second branch: Similar acts as evidence [Sec. 35, Rule
130] [2 Regalado 758, 774, 2008 Ed.

c. Admission by a Third Party
General rule:
The rights of a party cannot be prejudiced by an act,
declaration, or omission of another [Sec. 29, Rule 130
Exceptions:
1. Partner’s or Agent’s Admission [Sec. 30, Rule 130]
2. Admission by conspirator [Sec. 31, Rule 130]
3. Admission by privies [Sec. 32, Rule 130

Admission by a Co-Partner or Agent
1. The act or declaration
2. Of a partner or agent a. authorized by the party to make a statement
concerning the subject; or b. within the scope of his/her authority
3. During the existence of the partnership or agency,
4. May be given in evidence against such party
5. After the partnership or agency is shown by evidence other than
such act or declaration (evidence aliunde)

Admission by a Conspirator
1. The act or declaration
2. Of a conspirator
3. In furtherance of the conspiracy and during its existence,
4. May be given in evidence against the coconspirator
5. After the conspiracy is shown by evidence other than
such act or declaration (evidence aliunde)

Admission by Privies
Privies
Persons who are partakers or have an interest in any action or thing, or
any relation to another
1. One derives title to property from another
2. The act, declaration, or omission
◦ a. of the latter (the person from whom title is derived)
◦ b. while holding the title c. in relation to the property
3. is evidence against the former (one who derives title from another)

Admission by Silence
Requisites: When silence is deemed an admission
1. Person heard or understood the statement;
2. That he was at a liberty to make a denial;
3. That the statement was about a matter affecting his rights or in
which he was interested and which naturally calls for a response;
4. That the facts were within his knowledge; and
5. That the fact admitted from his silence is material to the issue

Confession
Requisites
1. Express and categorical acknowledgement of guilt
2. Facts admitted constitutes a criminal offense
3. Given voluntarily
4. Intelligently made, realizing the importance or legal
significance of the act
5. No violation of Secs. 12 and 17, Art. III of the Constitution

Confession
Effect of Extrajudicial Confession of Guilt
General rule: An extrajudicial confession made by an accused,
shall not be a sufficient ground for conviction
Exception: When corroborated by evidence of corpus delicti
[Sec. 3, Rule 133]
Corpus Delicti
Substance of the crime; the fact that a crime has actually been
committed [People v. De Leon, G.R. No. 180762 (2009)]

Admission vs. Confession
Admission of a Party Admission of a Party
Admission of a Party Acknowledgment of guilt or liability
Maybe express or tacit Must be express
Maybe made by 3rd parties, and in certain cases, Can be made only by the party himself, and
admissible against a party admissible against his co-accused in some
instances
Can be made only by the party himself, and Declarations
admissible against his co-accused in some
instances
May be in any proceeding Criminal case
(Sec. 27, Rule 130 refers to a party without Criminal case (Sec. 34, Rule 130 refers to
distinction as to nature of proceeding) “accused”)

C. TESTIMONIAL
EVIDENCE
4. PREVIOUS CONDUCT AS EVIDENCE
PREVIOUS CONDUCT AS
EVIDENCE
Section 35. Similar acts as evidence. –
Evidence that one did or did not do a certain thing at
one time is not admissible to prove that he or she did
or did not do the same or similar thing at another
time; but it may be received to prove a specifi c
intent or knowledge, identity, plan, system, scheme,
habit, custom or usage, and the like. (34a)

PREVIOUS CONDUCT AS
EVIDENCE
Section 36. Unaccepted offer.
– An offer in writing to pay a particular sum of money or to
deliver a written instrument or specific personal property is, if
rejected without valid cause, equivalent to the actual production
and tender of the money, instrument, or property. (35)
[Section 36. Testimony generally confined to personal
knowledge; hearsay excluded. (Transposed to Sec. 22. Testimony
confined to personal knowledge.)]

Similar Acts as Evidence
General rule:
Evidence that one did or did not do a certain thing at one time is not admissible
to prove that he/she did or did not do the same or similar thing at another time
Exceptions:
Said evidence may be received to prove a:
1. specific intent or knowledge
2. identity
3. plan, system, or scheme
4. habit
5. custom or usage and the like

Admissibility of Offers of compromise
In civil cases
An offer of compromise is not an admission of any liability and is not admissible
in evidence against the offeror General rule:
Evidence of conduct or statements made in compromise negotiations are also
not admissible
Exceptions: Evidence otherwise discoverable or offered for another purpose
such as
a. proving bias or prejudice of a witness;
b. negativing a contention of undue delay; or
c. proving an effort to obstruct a criminal investigation or prosecution

In criminal cases
General rule:
An offer of compromise by the accused may be
received as an implied admission of guilt
Exception: In cases involving quasi-offenses (criminal
negligence) or those allowed by the law to be
compromised

Pleas of guilty
Not admissible against the accused who made the plea or offer:
a. Plea of guilty later withdrawn;
b. Unaccepted offer of a plea of guilty to a lesser offense; or
c. Statement made in the course of plea bargaining with the prosecution which
does not result in a plea of guilty or which results in a plea of guilty later withdrawn
Offer to pay medical, hospital or other expenses
Offer to pay or the payment of medical, hospital or other expenses occasioned by
an injury is not admissible in evidence as proof of civil or criminal liability for the
injury

C. TESTIMONIAL
EVIDENCE
5. HEARSAY
Hearsay
Section 37. Hearsay. – Hearsay is a statement other than
one made by the declarant while testifying at a trial or
hearing, off ered to prove the truth of the facts asserted
therein. A statement is (1) an oral or written assertion or
(2) a non-verbal conduct of a person, if it is intended by
him or her as an assertion. Hearsay evidence is
inadmissible except as otherwise provided in these
Rules.

Hearsay
A statement is not hearsay if the declarant testifies at the trial
or hearing and is subject to cross-examination concerning the
statement, and the statement is (a) inconsistent with the
declarant’s testimony, and was given under oath subject to the
penalty of perjury at a trial, hearing, or other proceeding, or in
a deposition; (b) consistent with the declarant’s testimony and
is offered to rebut an express or implied charge against the
declarant of recent fabrication or improper influence or
motive; or (c) one of identification of a person made after
perceiving him or her. (n)
Hearsay
Hearsay is a statement other than the one made by the declarant
while testifying at a trial or hearing, offered to prove the truth of the
facts asserted therein
Statement—oral or written assertion OR non-verbal conduct of a
person if it is intended by him/her as an assertion
Elements
1. Declarant is out of court
2. Out of court declaration is offered as proof of its contents
3. Absence of opportunity for cross-examination
Hearsay
General Rule on Hearsay
A witness can testify only as to those facts which he/she knows of his
personal knowledge, that is, which are derived from his/her own
perception [Sec. 22, Rule 130]
If a party does not object to hearsay evidence, the same is
admissible, as a party can waive his right to cross-examine [People v.
Ola, G.R. No. L-47147 (1987)]
Repeated failure to cross-examine is an implied waiver [Savory
Luncheonette v. Lakas ng Manggagawang Pilipino, G.R. No. L-38964
(1975)]
Hearsay
When a statement is NOT hearsay:
1. If the declarant testifies at the trial or hearing and is subject to
cross-examination concerning the statement; and 2. The statement is:
◦ a. Inconsistent with the declarant’s testimony and was given under oath
subject to the penalty of perjury at a trial, hearing, or other proceeding,
or in a deposition
◦ b. Consistent with the declarant’s testimony and is offered to rebut an
express or implied charge against the declarant of recent fabrication or
improper influence or motive
◦ c. Identification of a person made after perceiving him/her

Hearsay
Reason for Exclusion of Hearsay Evidence
The underlying rule against hearsay are serious concerns about the
worth (trustworthiness, reliability) of hearsay evidence. Because such
evidence: 1. was not given under oath or solemn affirmation; and 2. was
not subject to cross-examination by opposing counsel to test the
perception, memory, veracity and articulateness of out-of-court
declarant or actor upon whose reliability on which the worth of the out-
of-court testimony depends.
Hearsay evidence is excluded precisely because the party against whom
it is presented is deprived of or is bereft of opportunity to cross-examine
the persons to whom the statements or writings are attributed.
C. TESTIMONIAL
EVIDENCE
6. EXCEPTIONS TO THE HEARSAY RULE
Exceptions to the Hearsay Rule
Section 38. Dying declaration. –
The declaration of a dying person, made under the
consciousness of an impending death, may be received
in any case wherein his or her death is the subject of
inquiry, as evidence of the cause and surrounding
circumstances of such death. (37

1. Dying Declaration
Also known as “antemortem statement” or “statement in articulo mortis”
a. Declaration of a dying person
b. Declaration was made under the consciousness of an impending death
c. Declaration may be received in any case wherein his/her death is the subject of
inquiry, as evidence of the cause and surrounding circumstances of such death d.
Declarant would have been competent as a witness had he survived; and
e. Declarant should have died
Rule 130-Rules of admissibility (TESTIMONIAL EVIDENCE) EVIDENCE

A dying declaration must be single hearsay to be
admissible
Rationale for Admissibility
As a general rule, when a person is at the point of death,
every motive to falsehood is silenced
The law considers the point of death as a situation so
solemn and awful as creating an obligation equal to that
which is imposed by an oath administered by the court.
1. Dying Declaration
Purposes for Admitting Dying Declaration:
1. To identify the accused or
2. To show the cause of death or
3. To show the circumstances under which the assault was made upon him.
Intervening Time is Immaterial
There must be a settled, hopeless expectation that death is at hand. It is
sufficient that the declarant believed himself to be in imminent danger of
death at the time of such declaration.

Section 39. Statement of decedent or person of unsound mind. –
In an action against an executor or administrator or other representative of a
deceased person, or against a person of unsound mind, upon a claim or demand
against the estate of such deceased person or against such person of unsound mind,
where a party or assignor of a party or a person in whose behalf a case is prosecuted
testifi es on a matter of fact occurring before the death of the deceased person or
before the person became of unsound mind, any statement of the deceased or the
person of unsound mind, may be received in evidence if the statement was made
upon the personal knowledge of the deceased or the person of unsound mind at a
time when the matter had been recently perceived by him or her and while his or
her recollection was clear. Such statement, however, is inadmissible if made under
circumstances indicating its lack of trustworthiness. (23a)

2. Statement of decedent or person of unsound mind
General rule: Any statement of the deceased or the person of unsound mind may be received in
evidence
a. In an action against:
◦ 1. an executor, administrator or other representative of a deceased person; OR
◦ 2. a person of unsound mind
b. Upon a claim or demand against the estate of such deceased person or against such person of
unsound mind
c. Where party or assignor of a party or a person in whose behalf a case is prosecuted testifies on a
matter of fact occurring before the death of the deceased or before the person became of unsound
mind
d. Statement was made by the deceased or person of unsound mind at a time where the matter had
been recently perceived by him/her while his/her recollection was clear
2. Statement of decedent or person of unsound mind
Exception: The statement is inadmissible if made under circumstances
indicating its lack of trustworthiness
The former Dead Man’s rule has now been superseded.
To minimize however the danger of injustice to the decedent’s estate or
person of unsound mind, the (otherwise hearsay) statement of the
deceased or person of unsound mind may be admitted, so long as the
statement was made upon the personal knowledge of the deceased or
person of unsound mind, at the time when the matter had been recently
perceived by him or her and while his or her recollection was clear, and
there are no circumstances indicating its lack of trustworthiness.
Section 40. Declaration against interest. –
The declaration made by a person deceased or unable to testify against
the interest of the declarant, if the fact asserted in the declaration was
at the time it was made so far contrary to the declarant’s own interest
that a reasonable person in his or her position would not have made
the declaration unless he or she believed it to be true, may be received
in evidence against himself or herself or his or her successors in interest
and against third persons. A statement tending to expose the declarant
to criminal liability and off ered to exculpate the accused is not
admissible unless corroborating circumstances clearly indicate the
trustworthiness of the statement. (38a)
3. Declaration against interest
◦ a. Declarant is dead or unable to testify;
◦ b. Declaration relates to a fact against the interest of the declarant;
◦ c. At the time he made said declaration, declarant was aware that the same was contrary
to the declarant’s own interest; and
◦ d. Declarant had no motive to falsify and believed such declaration to be true
When NOT admissible
General rule: If the statement tends to expose the declarant to criminal liability and is
offered to exculpate the accused
Exception: Admissible if corroborating circumstances clearly indicate the
trustworthiness of the statement
Admissible against third persons
Declaration against interest made by the deceased, or by one unable to testify,
is admissible even against the declarant’s successors-in-interest or even against
third
Actual or real interest
It is essential that at the time of the statement, the declarant’s interest
affected thereby should be actual, real or apparent, not merely contingent,
future or, conditional; otherwise the declaration would not in reality be against
interest. (Example: declarations regarding a declarant’s inheritance are not
admissible because these are future interests)
Scope
The declaration against interest includes all kinds of interests such as pecuniary,
proprietary, or penal interests. Kinds of
Declarations against Interests:
1. Declaration against Pecuniary Interests - those which may bar in whole or in part
the declarant’s interests or which may give rise to a monetary claim against him.
2. Declaration against Proprietary Interests - those which are at variance with the
declarant’s property interests
3. Declaration against Penal Interests - those which put the declarant at the risk of
prosecution.
Section 41. Act or declaration about pedigree. –
The act or declaration of a person deceased or unable to testify, in respect to
the pedigree of another person related to him or her by birth[,] adoption, or
marriage or, in the absence thereof, with whose family he or she was so
intimately associated as to be likely to have accurate information concerning
his or her pedigree, may be received in evidence where it Section 41. Act or
declaration about pedigree. – The act or declaration of a person deceased or
unable to testify, in respect to the pedigree of another person related to him
or her by birth[,] adoption, or marriage or, in the absence thereof, with whose
family he or she was so intimately associated as to be likely to have accurate
information concerning his or her pedigree, may be received in evidence
where it
4. Act or declaration about pedigree
a. The act or declaration
b. Of a person deceased or unable to testify
c. In respect to the pedigree of another person related to him/her by
◦ 1. birth; 2. adoption; 3. marriage; or 4. in the absence thereof, with those family he/she
was so intimately associated as to be likely to have accurate information concerning
his/her pedigree
d. May be received in evidence where the act/declaration occurred before the
controversy; and e. Relationship between the declarant and the person whose pedigree
is in question must be shown by evidence other than such act or declaration (evidence
aliunde) [Sec. 41, Rule 130
Pedigree includes a. Relationship; b. Family genealogy; c. Birth; d.
Marriage; e. Death; f. Dates when these facts occurred; g. Places
where these facts occurred; h. Names of relatives; and i. Facts of
family history intimately connected with pedigree [Sec. 40, Rule 130]
Pedigree declaration by conduct
This rule may also consist of proof of acts or conduct of relatives and
the mode of treatment in the family of one whose parentage is in
question

Reasons for Admissibility
Declarations in regard to pedigree, although hearsay, are
admitted on the principle that they are natural expressions
of persons who must know the truth. Pedigree testimony is
admitted because it is the best that the nature of the case
admits and because greater evil might arise from the
rejection of such proof than from its admission.
Section 42. Family reputation or tradition regarding pedigree. –
The reputation or tradition existing in a family previous to the
controversy, in respect to the pedigree of any one of its
members, may be received in evidence if the witness testifying
thereon be also a member of the family, either by
consanguinity[,] affi nity, or adoption. Entries in family bibles or
other family books or charts, engraving on rings, family portraits
and the like, may be received as evidence of pedigree. (40a

5. Family reputation or tradition regarding pedigree
1. There is controversy in respect to the pedigree of any member of a family;
2. The reputation or tradition of the pedigree of the person concerned existed
previous to the controversy; and
3. The witness testifying to the reputation or tradition regarding the pedigree of the
person concerned must be a member of the family of said person either by
consanguinity, affinity or adoption.
Other Admissible Evidence
a. Entries in family bibles or other family books; b. Charts; c. Engravings on rings; d.
Family portraits and the like
Section 43. Common reputation. –
Common reputation existing previous to the controversy,
as to boundaries of or customs aff ecting lands in the
community and reputation as to events of general history
important to the community, or respecting marriage or
moral character, may be given in evidence. Monuments
and inscriptions in public places may be received as
evidence of common reputation. (41a)

6. Common reputation.
Definition: The definite opinion of the community in which the fact to be proved is known or
exists. It means the general or substantially undivided reputation, as distinguished from a
partial or qualified one, although it need not be unanimous
a. Common reputation existed ante litem motam
b. Reputation pertains to:
1. boundaries of or customs affecting lands in the community
2. events of general history important to the community
3. marriage, or
4. moral character [Sec. 43, Rule 130] Note: The 30-year rule was removed in the Amended
Rules
Section 44. Part of the res gestae. – Statements made
by a person while a startling occurrence is taking place
or immediately prior or subsequent thereto[,] under the
stress of excitement caused by the occurrence with
respect to the circumstances thereof, may be given in
evidence as part of the res gestae. So, also, statements
accompanying an equivocal act material to the issue,
and giving it a legal significance, may be received as part
of the res gestae. (42a)
7. Part of the res gestae
Res gestae — “things done” Res gestae, as an exception to the
hearsay rule, refers to those exclamations and statements made
by either the participants, victims, or spectators to a crime
immediately before, during, or after the commission of the
crime, when the circumstances are such that the statements
were made as a spontaneous reaction or utterance inspired by
the excitement of the occasion and there was no opportunity
for the declarant to deliberate and to fabricate a false statement

Requisites for Admissibility of Spontaneous Statements:
1. There must be a startling occurrence;
2. The statement must be made before the declarant had the time to
contrive or devise a falsehood; and
3. The statement must concern the occurrence in question and its
immediate attending circumstances.
It is important to stress that the statement must not only be spontaneous.
It must also be made at a time when there was no opportunity for the
person to concoct or develop his own story.
Requisites for Admissibility of Verbal Acts
1. Act or occurrence characterized must be equivocal;
2. Verbal acts must characterize or explain the equivocal act;
3. Equivocal act must be relevant to the issue; and
4. Verbal acts must be contemporaneous with equivocal act

Section 45. Records of regularly conducted business activity. – A
memorandum, report, record or data compilation of acts, events,
conditions, opinions, or diagnoses, made by writing, typing,
electronic, optical or other similar means at or near the time of or
from transmission or supply of information by a person with
knowledge thereof, and kept in the regular course or conduct of a
business activity, and such was the regular practice to make the
memorandum, report, record, or data compilation by electronic,
optical or similar means, all of which are shown by the testimony of
the custodian or other qualifi ed witnesses, is excepted from the rule
on hearsay evidence. (43a)
8. Records of regularly conducted business activity
a. Memorandum, report, record or data compilation
◦ 1. Of acts, events, conditions, opinions, or diagnoses
◦ 2. Made by writing, typing, electronic, optical, or other similar means
◦ 3. At or near the time of or from transmission or supply of information
b. Entrant had knowledge thereof
c. Records are kept in the regular course or conduct of a business activity
d. The making of the memorandum, report, record, or data compilation by electronic,
optical or similar means is regular practice
e. All of the above are shown by the testimony of a custodian or other qualified witness

8. Records of regularly conducted business activity
Reason for rule
The duty of the employees to communicate facts is of
itself a badge of trustworthiness of the entries [Security
Bank and Trust Company v. Gan, G.R. No. 150464 (2006)]
These entries are accorded unusual reliability because
their regularity and continuity are calculated to
discipline record keepers in the habit of precision
Section 46. Entries in official records. –
Entries in official records made in the performance of his
or her duty by a public officer of the Philippines, or by a
person in the performance of a duty specially enjoined
by law, are prima facie evidence of the facts therein
stated. (44a)

9. Entries in official records.
a. Entries in official records were made by a public officer in the
performance of his/her duties or by a person in the performance of a
duty specially enjoined by law;
b. Entrant must have personal knowledge of the facts stated by him or
such facts acquired by him from reports made by persons under a
legal duty to submit the same; and
c. Entries were duly entered in a regular manner in the official records

The trustworthiness of public documents and the value given to
the entries made therein could be grounded on: a. the sense of
official duty in the preparation of the statement made
b. the penalty which is usually affixed to a breach of that duty;
c. the routine and disinterested origin of most such statements;
and
d. the publicity of record which makes more likely the prior
exposure of such errors as might have occurred
Entries in official records are merely prima facie evidence
of the facts therein stated [Sec. 46, Rule 130]
Entries in a police blotter are not conclusive proof of the
truth of such entries [People v. Cabuang, G.R. No.
103292 (1993)]
Baptismal certificates or parochial records of baptism are
not official records
Section 47. Commercial lists and the like. –
Evidence of statements of matters of interest to persons
engaged in an occupation contained in a list, register,
periodical, or other published compilation is admissible
as tending to prove the truth of any relevant matter so
stated if that compilation is published for use by persons
engaged in that occupation and is generally used and
relied upon by them therein. (45)
10. Commercial lists and the like.
a. Evidence of statements of matters of interest to persons engaged
in an occupation
b. Such statements are contained in a list, register, periodical, or
other published compilations
c. Compilation is published for use by persons engaged in that
occupation; and 1. Example: mortality tables, MIMS drug database
d. It is generally used and relied upon by them
Section 48. Learned treatises. – A published treatise,
periodical or pamphlet on a subject of history, law,
science, or art is admissible as tending to prove the
truth of a matter stated therein if the court takes judicial
notice, or a witness expert in the subject testifi es, that
the writer of the statement in the treatise, periodical or
pamphlet is recognized in his or her profession or calling
as expert in the subject. (46a)

11. Learned treatises.
a. Published treatise, periodical or pamphlet is on a subject of
history, law, science, or art; and
b. Court takes either:
1. judicial notice of it, or
2. a witness expert in the subject testifies that the writer of the
statement in the treatise, periodical or pamphlet is recognized in
his/her profession or calling as expert in the subject
11. Learned treatises.
Scientific studies or articles and websites which were
culled from the internet, attached to the Petition, and
were not testified to by an expert witness are basically
hearsay in nature and cannot be given probative weight.

Section 49. Testimony or deposition at a former
proceeding. –
The testimony or deposition of a witness deceased or out
of the Philippines or who cannot, with due diligence, be
found therein, or is unavailable or otherwise unable to
testify, given in a former case or proceeding, judicial or
administrative, involving the same parties and subject
matter, may be given in evidence against the adverse party
who had the opportunity to cross-examine him or her. (47a)
12. Testimony or Deposition at a Former Trial
a. Witness is dead, out of the Philippines or with due diligence cannot be found
therein, unavailable, or unable to testify;
b. The testimony or deposition was given in a former case or proceeding, judicial or
administrative, between the same parties or those representing the same interests;
c. Former case involved the same subject as that in the present case although on
different causes of action;
d. Issue testified to by the witness in the former trial is the same issue involved in the
present case; and
e. Adverse party had the opportunity to cross-examine the witness in the former case

12. Testimony or Deposition at a Former Trial
Inability to testify (meaning and standard)
The inability of the witness to testify must proceed from
a grave cause, almost amounting to death, as when the
witness is old and has lost the power of speech. Mere
refusal shall not suffice [

Section 50. Residual exception. – A statement not specifi cally covered by any of
the foregoing exceptions, having equivalent circumstantial guarantees of
trustworthiness, is admissible if the court determines that (a) the statement is off
ered as evidence of a material fact; (b) the statement is more probative on the
point for which it is off ered than any other evidence which the proponent can
procure through reasonable eff orts; and (c) the general purposes of these [R]ules
and the interests of justice will be best served by admission of the statement into
evidence. However, a statement may not be admitted under this exception unless
the proponent makes known to the adverse party, suffi ciently in advance of the
hearing, or by the pre-trial stage in the case of a trial of the main case, to provide
the adverse party with a fair opportunity to prepare to meet it, the proponent’s
intention to off er the statement and the particulars of it, including the name and
address of the declarant. (n)
13. Residual exception
Requisites for admissibility
a. Statement not specifically covered by any of the foregoing exceptions;
b. Has the equivalent circumstantial guarantees of trustworthiness
c. The court determines that:
1. the statement is offered as evidence of a material fact;
2. it is more probative on the point for which it is offered than any other evidence which the
proponent can procure through reasonable efforts; and
3. the general purposes of these rules and the interests of justice will be best served by its
admission d. Proponent makes known to the adverse party, sufficiently in advance of the hearing
or by the pre-trial stage in case of a trial of the main case, to provide the adverse party with a fair
opportunity to prepare to meet it, the proponent’s intention to offer the statement and its
particulars, including the name and address of the declarant
Independently Relevant Statements
(IRS
Statements or writings attributed to a person not on the
witness stand, which are being offered not to prove the
truth of the facts stated therein, but only to prove that
such were actually made.
These are not covered by the hearsay rule [People v.
Cusi, G.R. No. L-20986 (1965)]
These are statements which are relevant independently
of whether they are true or not
Independently Relevant Statements
(IRS
Two classes of independently relevant statements:
1. Statements which are the very facts in issue, and
2. Statements which are circumstantial evidence of the facts in issue. They include the
following:
a. Statement 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, that is, 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. TESTIMONIAL
EVIDENCE
7. OPINION RULE
OPINION RULE
Section 51. General rule. –
The opinion of a witness is not admissible, except as indicated
in the following sections. (48)
Section 52. Opinion of expert witness. –
The opinion of a witness on a matter requiring special
knowledge, skill, experience, training or education, which he or
she is shown to possess, may be received in evidence. (49a)

OPINION RULE
Section 53. Opinion of ordinary witnesses. –
The opinion of a witness, for which proper basis is given, may be received in
evidence regarding –
(a) [T]he identity of a person about whom he or she has adequate
knowledge;
(b) A handwriting with which he or she has sufficient familiarity; and
(c) The mental sanity of a person with whom he or she is sufficiently
acquainted.
The witness may also testify on his or her impressions of the emotion,
behavior, condition or appearance of a person. (50a)
OPINION RULE
Opinion is an inference or conclusion drawn from facts observed [Black’s
Law Dictionary]
General rule:
The opinion of witness is not admissible
Exceptions:
a. Expert witness
b. Ordinary witness

EXPERT WITNESS
Expert witness is one who has made the subject upon which he gives his
opinion a matter of particular study, practice or observation and he must
have particular and special knowledge on the subject [People v.
Dekingco, G.R. No. 87685 (1990)]
Competency of witness is a preliminary question before testimony is
admitted. It must be shown that the witness is really an expert;
determination of competency is a preliminary question [
Weight given to expert testimony. Courts are not bound by the findings
or opinions of the expert. Their evidence is not conclusive, but merely
advisory.

EXPERT WITNESS
How to present an expert witness
1. Introduce and qualify the witness;
2. Let him give his factual testimony, if he has knowledge of the facts;
3. Begin the hypothetical question by asking him to assume certain facts as true;
4. Conclude the question, by first asking the expert if he has an opinion on a
certain point
5. assuming that these facts are true and secondly, asking him, after he has
answered affirmatively, to give his opinion on the point;
6. After he has stated his opinion, ask him to give his reasons.

ORDINARY WITNESS
The opinion of an ordinary witness is admissible:
1. If proper basis is given, and
2. Regarding:
◦ a. Identity of a person about whom he/she has adequate knowledge;
◦ b. Handwriting with which he/she has sufficient familiarity;
◦ c. Mental sanity of a person with whom he/she is sufficiently acquainted;
and
◦ d. Impressions of the i. emotion, ii. behavior, iii. condition, or iv. appearance
of a person

C. TESTIMONIAL
EVIDENCE
7. CHARACTER EVIDENCE
CHARACTER EVIDENCE
Section 54. Character evidence not generally admissible; exceptions. – Evidence
of a person’s character or a trait of character is not admissible for the purpose of
proving action in conformity therewith on a particular occasion, except:
(a) In Criminal Cases:
◦ (1) The character of the off ended party may be proved if it tends to establish in any
reasonable degree the probability or improbability of the off ense charged.
◦ (2) The accused may prove his or her good moral character[,] pertinent to the moral
trait involved in the offense charged. However, the prosecution may not prove his or
her bad moral character unless on rebuttal.
(b) In Civil Cases: Evidence of the moral character of a party in a civil case is
admissible only when pertinent to the issue of character involved in the case.

CHARACTER EVIDENCE
(c) In Criminal and Civil Cases: Evidence of the good character of a
witness is not admissible until such character has been impeached.
In all cases in which evidence of character or a trait of character of a
person is admissible, proof may be made by testimony as to reputation
or by testimony in the form of an opinion. On cross-examination, inquiry
is allowable into relevant specific instances of conduct.
In cases in which character or a trait of character of a person is an
essential element of a charge, claim or defense, proof may also be made
of specific instances of that person’s conduct. (51a; 14, Rule 132)

CHARACTER EVIDENCE
Character distinguished from reputation
'Character' is what a man is, and 'reputation' is what he is supposed to
be in what people say he is. 'Character' depends on attributes possessed,
and 'reputation' on attributes which others believe one to possess. The
former signifies reality and the latter merely what is accepted to be
reality at present [Lim v. C.A., G.R. No. 91114 (1992)].
General rule: Evidence of a person’s character or a trait of character is
not admissible for the purpose of proving action in conformity therewith
on a particular occasion

CHARACTER EVIDENCE
Exceptions:
a. Criminal cases
b. Civil case
c. In both civil and criminal cases
1. Evidence of good character of witness is not admissible until such
character has been impeached
2. When the character or trait of character is an essential element of a
charge, claim or defense

CRIMINAL CASES
1. Accused –
May prove his/her good moral character, which is pertinent to the moral
trait involved in the offense charged.
2. Prosecution –
May not prove the bad moral character of the accused, except in
rebuttal.
3. Offended Party –
May be proved if it tends to establish in any reasonable degree the
probability or improbability of the offense charged
CRIMINAL CASES
Good moral character of accused
The purpose of presenting evidence of good moral character is to prove
the improbability of his doing the act charged. The accused may prove
his good moral character only if it is pertinent to the moral trait involved
in the offense charged [Herrera]
Bad moral character of accused in rebuttal Unless and until the accused
gives evidence of his good moral character the prosecution may not
introduce evidence of his bad character [Herrera, citing People v.
Rabanes, G.R. No. 93709 (1992)]

CRIMINAL CASES
Character evidence must be limited to the traits and characteristics
involved in the type of offense charged.
Thus: ● on a charge of rape: character for chastity
● on a charge of assault: character for peaceableness or violence
● on a charge of embezzlement: character for honesty
Proof of the bad character of the victim is not admissible:
● In a murder case: If the crime was committed through treachery and
evident premeditation
● In a rape case: If through violence and intimidation
CRIMINAL CASES
Rape Shield Rule
In prosecution for rape, evidence of complainant’s past sexual conduct,
opinion thereof or of his/her reputation shall not be admitted unless,
and only to the extent that the court finds that such evidence is material
and relevant to the case [Sec 6, R.A. 8505]
Sexual Abuse Shield Rule The following evidence is not admissible in any
criminal proceeding involving alleged child sexual abuse: 1. Evidence to
prove that the alleged victim engaged in other sexual behavior; and 2.
Evidence offered to prove the sexual predisposition of the alleged victim
[Sec 30, Rule on Examination of a Child Witness]

CIVIL CASES
Moral character is admissible only when pertinent to the issue of
character involved in the case

CRIMINAL AND CIVIL CASES
Evidence of the witness’ good character is not admissible until such
character has been impeached
In all cases in which evidence of character or a trait of character of a
person is admissible, proof may be made by:
1. Testimony as to reputation; or
2. Testimony in the form of an opinion On cross-examination, inquiry is
allowable into relevant specific instances of conduct.
In cases where the character or trait of character is an essential
element of a charge, claim, or defense, proof may also be made of specific
instances of that person’s conduct.
References
2020 Amended Rules on Evidence
Bernardo, O. B. (2008). Evidence: annotated. National
Book Store. Mandaluyong City.
2021 Blue Notes Remedial Law, Ateneo Law School
2020 UP BOC, University of the Philippines College of
2020 UST Golden Notes, University of Sto Thomas
EVIDENCE
RULE 131
]BURDEN OF PROOF, BURDEN OF
EVIDENCE AND PRESUMPTIONS
RULE 131
BURDEN OF PROOF AND BURDEN OF
EVIDENCE
EVIDENCE
Section 1. Burden of proof and burden of evidence. – Burden
of proof is the duty of a party to present evidence on the facts
in issue necessary to establish his or her claim or defense by the
amount of evidence required by law. Burden of proof never
shifts. Burden of evidence is the duty of a party to present
evidence suffi cient to establish or rebut a fact in issue to
establish a prima facie case. Burden of evidence may shift from
one party to the other in the course of the proceedings,
depending on the exigencies of the case. (1a)
Rule 131 BURDEN OF PROOF, BURDEN OF EVIDENCE AND PRESUMPTIONS EVIDENCE

BURDEN OF PROOF
Burden of proof is the duty of a party to present evidence on the facts in
issue necessary to establish his or her claim or defense by the amount of
evidence required by law. Burden of proof never shifts. [Sec. 1, Rule 131]
• In civil cases, the burden of proof is on the party who would be
defeated if no evidence were given on either side, the plaintiff with
respect to his complaint, the defendant with respect to his counterclaim,
and the cross-claimant, with respect to his cross-claim.
• In criminal cases, the burden of proof rests on the prosecution

BURDEN OF EVIDENCE
Burden of evidence is the duty of a party to present evidence sufficient to
establish or rebut a fact in issue to establish a prima facie case. Burden of
evidence may shift from one party to the other in the course of the
proceedings, depending on the exigencies of the case. [Sec. 1, Rule 131]
A party will have the burden of evidence only if there is any factum
probandum (whether evidentiary or otherwise) that the adverse party has
already established (whether by law, rule, or by virtue of evidence that he
has presented) that he (the potential proponent) has to overcome. A party
will not have any burden of evidence at all if the adverse party has not
established any factum probandum in the first place

EVIDENCE
The burden of proof is generally determined by the pleadings filed by the
party; the burden of evidence is generally determined by the
developments at the trial, or by the provisions of the substantive law or
procedural rules which may relieve the party from presenting evidence
on the fact alleged, i.e., presumptions, judicial notice and admissions [2
Regalado 816-817, 2008 Ed.]
In both civil and criminal cases, the burden of evidence lies with the
party who asserts an affirmative allegation

Equipoise Rule or Equipoise Doctrine
The doctrine refers to the situation where the evidence of the parties are
evenly balanced or there is doubt on which side the evidence
preponderates. In this case, the decision should be against the party with
the burden of proof
In criminal cases, the equipoise rule provides that where the evidence is
evenly balanced, the constitutional presumption of innocence tilts the
scales in favor of the accused

Presumptions
Presumptions are inferences as to the existence of a fact not actually
known, arising from its usual connection with another which is known,
or a conjecture based on past experience as to what course human
affairs ordinarily take.
A presumption can rest only upon ascertained facts. It cannot be based
on other presumptions, assumptions, probabilities or inferences
Presumptions are not allegations, nor do they supply their absence.
Presumptions are conclusions. They do not apply when there are no
facts or allegations to support them

Presumptions
Presumption of fact Presumption of law
Praesumptiones hominis Praesumptiones juris
Those which the experience of Those which the law requires to be drawn from
mankind has shown to be valid, the existence of established facts in the absence of
founded on general knowledge and contrary evidence; derived from the law itself
information; essentially an rather from common logic or probability
inference In the absence of a legal provision or ruling, there
is no presumption of law.
e.g. Inference of guilt upon e.g. Presumption of innocence in favor of the
discovery of bloodied garment in accused, presumption of negligence of a common
possession of accused carrier

Presumptions
Conclusive Conclusive
Inferences which the law Satisfactory if uncontradicted,
makes so peremptory that it but may be contradicted and
will not allow them to be overcome by other evidence
overturned by any contrary
proof however strong

Section 2. Conclusive presumptions.
The following are instances of conclusive presumptions:
(a) Whenever a party has, by his or her own declaration, act, or
omission, intentionally and deliberately led another to believe a
particular thing true, and to act upon such belief, he or she cannot, in
any litigation arising out of such declaration, act or omission, be
permitted to falsify it; and
(b) The tenant is not permitted to deny the title of his or her landlord at
the time of the commencement of the relation of landlord and tenant
between them. (2a)

Conclusive Presumptions
The technical definition of “conclusive presumption” is implied by way of
contra-distinction with that for the term “disputable presumption” in
Sec. 3 of Rule 131 of the Rules of Court. Thus, a conclusive presumption
is a class of evidence which the law does not allow to be contradicted

Conclusive Presumptions
Conclusive presumptions in the ROC [Sec. 2, Rule 131]:
a. A party is not permitted falsify a thing whenever: ss of evidence which the law does not
allow to be contradicted.
i. By his or her own declaration, act or omission;
ii. He or she intentionally and deliberately led another to believe a particular thing is true;
iii. To act upon such belief; and
iv. The litigation arises out of such declaration act or omission
b. A tenant is not permitted to deny the title of his or her landlord at the time of the
commencement of the relation of landlord and tenant between them
These conclusive presumptions are based upon the doctrine of estoppel in pais, see Arts.
1431-1439, Civil Code
Section 3. Disputable
presumptions.
– The following presumptions are satisfactory if uncontradicted, but may
be contradicted and overcome by other evidence:
(a) That a person is innocent of crime or wrong;
(b) That an unlawful act was done with an unlawful intent;
(c) That a person intends the ordinary consequences of his or her
voluntary act;
(d) That a person takes ordinary care of his or her concerns;
(e) That evidence willfully suppressed would be adverse if produced;
(f) That money paid by one to another was due to the latter;
presumptions.
(g) That a thing delivered by one to another belonged to the latter;
(h) That an obligation delivered up to the debtor has been paid;
(i) That prior rents or installments had been paid when a receipt for the later one
is produced;
(j) That a person found in possession of a thing taken in the doing of a recent
wrongful act is the taker and the doer of the whole act; otherwise, that things
which a person possesses, or exercises acts of ownership over, are owned by him
or her;
(k) That a person in possession of an order on himself or herself for the payment
of the money, or the delivery of anything, has paid the money or delivered the
thing accordingly;
presumptions.
(l) That a person acting in a public offi ce was regularly appointed or elected to it;
(m) That offi cial duty has been regularly performed;
(n) That a court, or judge acting as such, whether in the Philippines or
elsewhere, was acting in the lawful exercise of jurisdiction;
(o) That all the matters within an issue raised in a case were laid before the court
and passed upon by it; and in like manner that all matters within an issue raised
in a dispute submitted for arbitration were laid before the arbitrators and passed
upon by them;
(p) That private transactions have been fair and regular;
(q) That the ordinary course of business has been followed

presumptions.
(r) That there was a suffi cient consideration for a contract;
(s) That a negotiable instrument was given or indorsed for a suffi cient
consideration;
(t) That an indorsement of a negotiable instrument was made before the
instrument was overdue and at the place where the instrument is dated;
(u) That a writing is truly dated;
(v) That a letter duly directed and mailed was received in the regular
course of the mail;

presumptions.
(w) That after an absence of seven [(7)] years, it being unknown whether
or not the absentee still lives, he or she is considered dead for all
purposes, except for those of succession.
The absentee shall not be considered dead for the purpose of opening
his or her succession until after an absence of ten [(10)] years. If he or
she disappeared after the age of seventy-fi ve [(75)] years, an absence of
fi ve [(5)] years shall be suffi cient in order that his or her succession may
be opened.
The following shall be considered dead for all purposes including the
division of the estate among the heirs:

presumptions.
(1) A person on board a vessel lost during a sea voyage, or an aircraft
which is missing, who has not been heard of for four [(4)] years since the
loss of the vessel or aircraft;
(2) A member of the armed forces who has taken part in armed
hostilities, and has been missing for four [(4)] years;
(3) A person who has been in danger of death under other circumstances
and whose existence has not been known for four [(4)] years; and

presumptions.
(4) If a married person has been absent for four [(4)] consecutive years,
the spouse present may contract a subsequent marriage if he or she has
a well-founded belief that the absent spouse is already dead. In case of
disappearance, where there is a danger of death[, under] the
circumstances hereinabove provided, an absence of only two [(2)] years
shall be suffi cient for the purpose of contracting a subsequent marriage.
However, in any case, before marrying again, the spouse present must
institute summary proceeding[s] as provided in the Family Code and in
the rules for declaration of presumptive death of the absentee, without
prejudice to the eff ect of reappearance of the absent spouse[;]

presumptions.
(x) That acquiescence resulted from a belief that the thing acquiesced in was
conformable to the law or fact;
(y) That things have happened according to the ordinary course of nature and
ordinary nature habits of life;
(z) That persons acting as copartners have entered into a contract of copartnership;
(aa) That a man and woman deporting themselves as husband and wife have
entered into a lawful contract of marriage;
(bb) That property acquired by a man and a woman who are capacitated to marry
each other and who live exclusively with each other as husband and wife[,]
without the benefi t of marriage or under a void marriage, has been obtained by
their joint eff orts, work or industry[;]
presumptions.
(cc) That in cases of cohabitation by a man and a woman who are not
capacitated to marry each other and who have acquired property
through their actual joint contribution of money, property or industry,
such contributions and their corresponding shares[,] including joint
deposits of money and evidences of credit[,] are equal[;]

presumptions.
(dd) That if the marriage is terminated and the mother contracted another
marriage within three hundred [(300)] days after such termination of the former
marriage, these rules shall govern in the absence of proof to the contrary:
(1) A child born before one hundred eighty (180) days after the solemnization of
the subsequent marriage is considered to have been conceived during [the
former] marriage, [provided] it be born within the three hundred [(300)] days
after the termination of the former marriage; and
(2) A child born after one hundred eighty (180) days following the celebration of
the subsequent marriage is considered to have been conceived during such
marriage, even though it be born within the three hundred [(300)] days after the
termination of the former marriage[;]

presumptions.
(ee) That a thing once proved to exist continues as long as is usual with things of
that nature;
(ff ) That the law has been obeyed;
(gg) That a printed or published book, purporting to be printed or published by
public authority, was so printed or published;
(hh) That a printed or published book, purporting to contain reports of cases
adjudged in tribunals of the country where the book is published, contains
correct reports of such cases;
(ii) That a trustee or other person whose duty it was to convey real property to a
particular person has actually conveyed it to him or her when such presumption
is necessary to perfect the title of such person or his or her successor in interest;
presumptions.
(jj) That except for purposes of succession, when two [(2)] persons perish in the same calamity, such
as wreck, battle, or confl agration, and it is not shown who died fi rst, and there are no particular
circumstances from which it can be inferred, the survivorship is determined from the probabilities
resulting from the strength and the age of the sexes, according to the following rules:
1. If both were under the age of fi fteen [(15)] years, the older is deemed to have survived;
2. If both were above the age of sixty [(60)], the younger is deemed to have survived;
3. If one is under fi fteen [(15)] and the other above sixty [(60)], the former is deemed to have
survived;
4. If both be over fi fteen [(15)] and under sixty [(60)], and the sex be diff erent, the male is deemed
to have survived, if the sex be the same, the older; and
5. If one be under fi fteen [(15)] or over sixty [(60)], and the other between those ages, the latter is
deemed to have survived;

presumptions.
(kk) That if there is a doubt, as between two [(2)] or more persons who
are called to succeed each other, as to which of them died fi rst, whoever
alleges the death of one prior to the other, shall prove the same; in the
absence of proof, they shall be considered to have died at the same time.
(3a)

Section 4. No presumption of
legitimacy or illegitimacy
There is no presumption of legitimacy or illegitimacy of a child
born after three hundred [(300)] days following the dissolution
of the marriage or the separation of the spouses. Whoever
alleges the legitimacy or illegitimacy of such child must prove
his or her allegation. (4a

Section 5. Presumptions in civil actions
and proceedings
In all civil actions and proceedings not otherwise provided for
by the law or these Rules, a presumption imposes on the party
against whom it is directed the burden of going forward with
evidence to rebut or meet the presumption.
If presumptions are inconsistent, the presumption that is
founded upon weightier considerations of policy shall apply. If
considerations of policy are of equal weight, neither
presumption applies. (n)

Section 6. Presumption against an
accused in criminal cases
If a presumed fact that establishes guilt, is an element of the
offense charged, or negates a defense, the existence of the
basic fact must be proved beyond reasonable doubt and the
presumed fact follows from the basic fact beyond reasonable
doubt. (n)

References
2020 Amended Rules on Evidence
Bernardo, O. B. (2008). Evidence: annotated. National
Book Store. Mandaluyong City.
2021 Blue Notes Remedial Law, Ateneo Law School
2020 UP BOC, University of the Philippines College of
2020 UST Golden Notes, University of Sto Thomas
EVIDENCE

Evidence 2

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

You might also like

Evidence 2

Uploaded by

Document Information

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Evidence 2

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

EVIDENCE

(A.M. NO: 19-08-15-SC)12

Rule 128- general provisions EVIDENCE

Rule 128- general provisions EVIDENCE

Rule 128- general provisions EVIDENCE

Rule 128- general provisions EVIDENCE

Rule 128- general provisions EVIDENCE

Rule 128- general provisions EVIDENCE

Rule 128- general provisions EVIDENCE

Rule 128- general provisions EVIDENCE

Rule 128- general provisions EVIDENCE

Rule 128- general provisions EVIDENCE

Rule 128- general provisions EVIDENCE

Rule 128- general provisions EVIDENCE

Rule 128- general provisions EVIDENCE

Rule 128- general provisions EVIDENCE

Rule 128- general provisions EVIDENCE

Rule 128- general provisions EVIDENCE

Rule 128- general provisions EVIDENCE

Rule 128- general provisions EVIDENCE

Rule 129- WHAT NEED NOT BE PROVED EVIDENCE

Rule 129- WHAT NEED NOT BE PROVED EVIDENCE

Rule 129- WHAT NEED NOT BE PROVED EVIDENCE

Rule 129- WHAT NEED NOT BE PROVED EVIDENCE

Rule 129- WHAT NEED NOT BE PROVED EVIDENCE

Rule 129- WHAT NEED NOT BE PROVED EVIDENCE

Rule 129- WHAT NEED NOT BE PROVED EVIDENCE

Rule 129- WHAT NEED NOT BE PROVED EVIDENCE

Rule 129- WHAT NEED NOT BE PROVED EVIDENCE

Rule 129- WHAT NEED NOT BE PROVED EVIDENCE

Rule 129- WHAT NEED NOT BE PROVED EVIDENCE

Rule 129- WHAT NEED NOT BE PROVED EVIDENCE

Rule 129- WHAT NEED NOT BE PROVED EVIDENCE

Rule 129- WHAT NEED NOT BE PROVED EVIDENCE

Rule 129- WHAT NEED NOT BE PROVED EVIDENCE

Rule 129- WHAT NEED NOT BE PROVED EVIDENCE

Rule 129- WHAT NEED NOT BE PROVED EVIDENCE

Rule 130-Rules of admissibility EVIDENCE

Rule 130-Rules of admissibility EVIDENCE

Rule 130-Rules of admissibility EVIDENCE

Rule 130-Rules of admissibility (object evidence) EVIDENCE

Rule 130-Rules of admissibility EVIDENCE

Rule 130-Rules of admissibility EVIDENCE

Rule 130-Rules of admissibility EVIDENCE

Rule 130-Rules of admissibility (object evidence) EVIDENCE

Rule 130-Rules of admissibility (object evidence) EVIDENCE

Rule 130-Rules of admissibility (object evidence) EVIDENCE

Rule 130-Rules of admissibility (object evidence) EVIDENCE

Rule 130-Rules of admissibility (Documentary evidence) EVIDENCE

Rule 130-Rules of admissibility (Documentary evidence) EVIDENCE

Rule 130-Rules of admissibility (Documentary evidence) EVIDENCE

Rule 130-Rules of admissibility (Documentary evidence) EVIDENCE

Rule 130-Rules of admissibility (Documentary evidence) EVIDENCE

Rule 130-Rules of admissibility (Documentary evidence) EVIDENCE

le 130-Rules of admissibility (Documentary evidence) EVIDENCE

Rule 130-Rules of admissibility (Documentary evidence) EVIDENCE

Rule 130-Rules of admissibility (Documentary evidence) EVIDENCE

Rule 130-Rules of admissibility (Documentary evidence) EVIDENCE

◦ 1. due execution of the original;