OBJECT AND

DOCUMENTARY
EVIDENCE
MEMBERS:
MELANY DEL ROSARIO
LOVELY MAY V. TORRENTE
JHON TRIX BROKA
RICO DE BELEN
JOHN ED DE LUMEN
 A.Object Evidence

 1. Object or real evidence, as defined by the Rules ofCourt, refers to

evidence that is addressed to the senses of the court

 “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.”
OBJECT AS EVIDENCE

I. COVERAGE:
The definition covers any material that may be seen, heard, smelled, felt, or touched.
They are the “sensual evidence” and are grouped into.

A. Those exhibited to the Court or observed by it during the trial.

1. The weapons used, the articles recovered or seized as subjects of an offense, the effects
of the crime, clothing apparels

2. The wound or scars in the body in physical injury cases

3. Inspection of the body of the accused and his personal appearance to determine his
body build, physique, height, racial characteristics, and similarities with another, in
paternity suits.
B. Those which consists of the results of inspections of things or places
conducted by the court ( ocular inspections) outside the court

1. The observations made by the parties are duly recorded, pictures and
other representations may be made such as sketches and measurements

2. Examples: inspection of the crime scene; disputed boundaries; objects

which cannot be brought to court

C. Those which consist of the results of experiments, tests or

demonstrations, which may be scientific tests/experiments, or practical
tests/demonstrations provided the conduct of experiments/tests is subject
to the discretion of the court.
 REQUIREMENTS FOR ADMISSIBILITY

A. The evidence must be relevant

B. The evidence must be authenticated

C.The authentication must be made by a competent

witness;

D.The object must be formally offered in evidence..

Demonstrative evidence

Demonstrative evidence is not the actual thing butit is referred to as “demonstrative” because it represents or
demonstrates the real thing. It is not strictly “real” evidence because it is not the very thing involved in the case.
A map, a diagram, a photograph, and a model, fall under this category. This category of evidence is not
separately defined in the Rules of Court and appears to have been incorporated under the general term “object”
evidence.

View of an object or scene

1. Under Sec. 1 of Rule 130, when an object is relevant to the fact in issue, it may be exhibited to, examined or
viewed by the court

2. Courts have recognized that there are times when a party cannot bring an object to the court for viewing in
the courtroom. In such a situation, the court may take a view of an object. The court may make an ocular
inspection of a contested land to resolve questions of fact raised by the parties. It may inspect a crime scene to
clarify itself with certain matters raised by the litigants. It may view the conditions of vehicles involved in a
civil case for damages. Going out of the courtroom to observe places and objects is commonly termed a “view.
3. A view disrupts the usual trial process and is time-
consuming. Hence, in almost all jurisdictions, the trial
judge is granted discretion to grant or refuse a request
for a view

4. The inspection may be made inside or outside the

courtroom. An inspection or view outside the
courtroom should be made in the presence of the
parties or at least with previous notice to them..”
Categories of object evidence

1. For purposes of authentication of an object or for laying the foundation for the exhibit, object
evidence may be classified into the following

(a) Objects that have readily identifiable marks(unique objects)

(b) Objects that are made readily identifiable(objects made unique

If the object does not have a unique characteristic, like the typical kitchen knife that has no serial
number

(c) Objects with no identifying marks and cannot be marked (non-unique objects).,)
B.Documentary Evidence

(Rule 130)

Documentary evidence. - Documents as evidence consist of writings, recordings, photographs

or any material containing letters, words, sounds, numbers, figures, symbols, or their
equivalent, or other modes of written expression offered as proof of their contents. Photographs
include still pictures, drawings, stored images, x-ray films, motion pictures or videos.

Evidentiary concepts involved in the presentation of documentary evidence

To be admissible, documentary evidence, like any other evidence, must be relevant and
competent. It is also subject to general exclusionary rules such as the rule on hearsay,best
evidence rule, and parol evidence rule.
Requisites for admissibility of documentary evidence

The following are the requisites for the admissibility 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; an

(d) The document must be formally offered inevidence.

Meaning of “best evidence or original of document"

The term “best evidence,” as used in the “best evidence rule,” has been a
source of misconception. It has often been misunderstood and given a
meaning it does not deserve. Despite the word “best,” the rule does not
proclaim itself as the highest and most reliable evidence in the hierarchy of
evidence. The term “best” has nothing to do with the degree of its probative
value in relation to other types of evidentiary rules . It is not intended to mean
the “most superior” evidence. More Accurately, it is the “original document”
rule, or the “primary evidence” rule
Original document. —

(a) The original of the document is one the contents of which are the
subject of inquiry.

(b)When a document is in two or more copies executed at or about the

same time, with identical contents, all such copies are equally regarded
as originals.

(c) When an entry is repeated in the regular course of business, one

being copied from another at or near the time of the transaction, all the
entries are likewise equally regarded as originals.
A private document may be offered and admitted in
evidence both as documentary evidence and as object
evidence depending on the purpose for which the document
is offered. If offered to prove its existence, condition or for
any purpose other than the contents of a document, the same
is considered as an object evidence. When the private
document is offered as proof of its contents, the same is
considered as documentary evidence (Sec. 2, Rule 130,
Rules of Court). The document may be offered for both
purposes under the principle of multiple admissibility.
General Rule: The original document must be produced.

Exceptions:

1. When the original is lost or destroyed, or cannot be produced in court, without bad faith on the part
of the offeror;

2. When the original is in the custody or under the control of the party against whom the evidence is
offered, and the latter fails to produce it after reasonable notice, or the original cannot be obtained by
local judicial processes or procedures;

3. When the original consists of numerous accounts or other documents which cannot be examined in
court without great loss of time and the fact sought to be established from them is only the general
result of the whole; and

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

5. When the original is not closely-related to a controlling issue (Rule 130,Sec.3)

Reason for the best evidence rule

1. What is the purpose for presenting the original document?

The basic premise justifying the rule is the need to present to the court the exact
words of a writing where a slight variation of words may mean a great difference in
rights. An ancillary justification for the rule is the prevention and detection of
fraud. The rule is also justified by the need to avoid unintentional or intentional
mistaken transmissions of the contents of a document through the introduction of
selected portions of a writing to which the adverse party has no full access

2. To avoid possible erroneous interpretations or distortions of a writing, an

objection based on the best evidence rule prevents a party from proving the
contents of a writing by a copy thereof or by oral testimony if the original writing
itself is available.
Secondary evidence may be admitted only by laying the basis for its production.
Laying such basis requires compliance with the following:

Secondary evidence may be admitted only by laying the basis for its production.
Laying such basis requires compliance with the following:

The offeror must prove the existence and execution of the original document;

The offeror must show the cause of its unavailability such as the loss or destruction
of the original;

Requisites for the introduction of secondary evidence in case of loss, destruction or

unavailability of the original
1. Secondary evidence, like a copy of the original, is admissible
as an exception if the original writing has been lost , destroyed or
cannot be produced in court without bad faith on the part of the
party offering the secondary evidence. This exception does not
only cover loss or destruction but also other reasons for the failure
to produce the original in court even if the original is not lost or
destroyed, as when the original is beyond the territorial jurisdiction
of the court. Also falling within this exception are cases where the
original consists of inscriptions on immovable objects and
monuments such as tombstones because they cannot be produced
in court.
2. Under Sec. 5 of Rule 130, secondary evidence may be admitted only by
laying the basis for its production.

Specifically, laying such basis requires compliance with the

following:

(a) The offeror must prove the execution and existence of the original
document;

(b) The offeror must show the cause of its unavailability;and

(c) The offeror must show that the unavailability was not due to his bad
faith.
Requisites for the introduction of secondary evidence when the original is in the custody or
control of the adverse party

1. A showing that the original document is in the custody or under the control of the adverse
party does not ipso facto authorize the introduction of secondary evidence to prove its
contents. The party who seeks to present secondary evidence must first lay the basis for its
introduction. Laying the basis requires proof of the following

(a) that the original exists

(b) that said document is under the custody or control of the adverse party

(c) that the proponent of secondary evidence has given the adverse party reasonable notice
to produce the original document;an

(d) that the adverse party failed to produce the original document despite the reasonable
notice
Requisites for the introduction of secondary evidence when the
original consists of n umerous account

1. Under this exception, secondary evidence is admis-sible

(a) if the original consists of numerous accounts or other documents

(b) they cannot be examined in court without great loss of time; an

(c) the fact sought to be established from them is only the general
result of the whole (Sec. 3[c], Rule 130, Rules of Court).
Requisites for the introduction of secondary evidence when the original document is a
public record

There are instances when the original of a document is a public record or is recorded in a
public office (Sec. 3[d], Rule 130,Rules of Court). Public records are generally not to be
removed from the places where they are recorded and kept (Sec. 26, Rule 132, Rules of
Court). For this reason, the proof of the contents of a document which forms part of a
public record may be done by secondary evidence. This evidence is a certified true copy of
the original. This certified copy is to be issued by the public officer in custody of the
public records (Sec. 7, Rule 130, Rules ofCourt)

Effect of not offering a document in evidence after calling for its production and
inspection.

If the party who calls for the production of a document does not offer the same in
evidence, no unfavorable inference may be drawn from such failure. This is because under
Sec. 8 of Rule 130, a party who calls for the production of a document is not required to
offer it. The pertinent provision states:n.
When document is merely collaterally in issue

1. When a document is involved in the inquiry but the document is only collateral in issue, the best
evidence rule does not apply. A document is collaterally in issue when the purpose of introducing the
document is not to establish its terms, but to show facts that have no reference to its contents like its
existence, condition, execution or delivery

2. If a witness testifies that the victim was writing a letter when he was shot by the accused, the judge
would likely rule against the party who insists on the presentation of the letter because it is not the
subject of an important issue in the case and hence, merely collateral

3. Ifa witness testifies that he actually saw the debtor tender payment of his obligation to the creditor, he
need not be required to produce the original promissory note evidencing the debt because it is the act of
payment which is the focal point of the testimony, not the document. The document need not be
likewise presented when the witness merely testifies to the delivery of a deed of sale by X to Y because
the contents of the document itself is not the purpose of the testimony...
Photographs - Photographs of persons, things and places, when instructive to the
understanding of the case,will be admitted in evidence. For a still photograph to be
admitted,the same must be relevant and competent. It is competent when it is properly
authenticated by a witness who is familiar with the scene or person portrayed, and who
testifies that the photograph faithfully represents what it depicts.

Motion pictures and recordings - The rules that apply to photographs generally apply
to motion pictures and recordings. Because of the possibility of tampering and
distortion, courts have traditionally required a stricter standard for laying the foundation
for motion pictures and tape recordings. Courts then would require detailed testimony
as to the qualifications of the operator, a detailed description of the equipment used, and
the conditions under which the photograph
Diagrams, models and maps - These types of demonstrative
evidence are presented to indicate the relative locations or
positions of objects and persons. Aside from the requirement of
relevance, a diagram, model or map must be identified by a
witness who is familiar with what the evidence depicts, and that
the same is an accurate representation of the scene it portrays.
Like any other exhibit, the touchstone for admissibility of maps,
diagrams and models is the ability of the witness to authenticate
the exhibit. Some courts may require that the model, diagram or
map be made or drawn to scale. If not drawn to scale, the court
must be so informed.The Question as to the sufficiency of the
authentication is a matter of judicial discretion
X-ray pictures - X-ray pictures, also referred to as “skiagraphs” or “radiographs,” are
admissible when shown to have been made under circumstances as to ensure their
accuracy and relevancy to a material issue in the case . Authenticated x-rays are
normally involved in personal injury cases to show the location and extent of the injury.
X-rays are properly authenticated by the x-ray technician or the physician who testifies
to the competence of the person taking it, the procedure taken and that the x-ray picture
shown is that of the person, the anatomical part or the object involved in the case.

Scientific tests, demonstrations and experiments- The issue of refusing or granting

requests for demonstrations , experiments and tests in open court is a matter subject to
judicial discretion.
Paraffin tests

1. Paraffin tests, in general, have been considered as inconclusive by the Court because scientific experts
concur in the view that paraffin tests have proved extremely unreliable in use. The tests can only establish the
presence or absence of nitrates or nitrites on the hand, but the tests alone cannot determine whether the source
of the nitrates or nitrites was the discharge of a firearm

Polygraph tests (Lie detector tests

1. A polygraph test operates on the principle that stress causes physiological changes in the body which can be
measured to indicate whether the subject of the examination is telling the truth. During an examination in
which a polygraph is used, sensors are attached to the subject so that the polygraph can mechanically record
the subject's physiological responses to a series of questions

2. Courts accordingly uniformly reject the results of polygraph tests when offered in evidence for the purpose
of establishing the guilt or innocence of one accused of a crime because it has not yet attained scientific
acceptance as a reliable and accurate means of ascertaining truth or deception.
Parol Evidence

Evidence Aliunde - 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.

Extrinsic evidence - that may refer to testimonial, real or documentary evidence

Section 9. 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, 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.

An express trust concerning an immovable or any interest therein may not be proved by parol evidence.(Civil
Code of the Philippines, Art. 1443)
Exception a party may present evidence to modify, explain or add to
the terms of written agreement if he puts in issue in his 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.
Basis for the Rule

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

The reason for the parol evidence rule is the presumption that when the parties have
reduced their agreement to writing, they have made such writing the only repository and
memorial of the truth, and whatever is not found in the writing must be understood to
have been waived or abandoned. (Cruz v. CA, G.R. No. 79962,1990)
The rule forbidding the admission of parol or extrinsic evidence to
alter, vary, or contradict a written instrument does not apply so as to
prohibit the establishment by parol of an agreement between the
parties to a writing entered into subsequent to the time when the
written instrument was executed, notwithstanding such agreement
may have the effect of adding to, changing, modifying, or even
altogether abrogating the contract of the parties as evidenced by the
writing; for the parol evidence does not in any way deny that the
original agreement of the parties was that which the writing purports
to express, but merely goes to show that the parties have exercised
their right to change or abrogate the same, or to make a new and
independent contract. (Canuto v. Mariano, G.R.No.L-11346,1918)
A. Application of the parol evidence rule

When Parol Evidence Rule Applies

a. Existence of a valid contract;

b. The terms of the agreement must be in writing.

c. This may refer to either public or private writing;

d. The dispute is between parties and their successors in interest; and/or

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.

B .When parol evidence can be introduced

In order that the parol evidence may be admissible, the mistake or imperfection of the document, or its failure to express the true
intent and agreement of the parties, or the validity of the agreement, or the existence of other terms agreed to after the execution
of the written agreement must be put in issue in the pleadings. Where the plaintiff failed to allege any such fact in his complaint,
he cannot introduce parol evidence thereon.

If the defendant invoked such fact in his answer, parol evidence may be introduced as such fact is now put in issue.
Patent or Extrinsic Ambiguity

Is such ambiguity which is apparent on the face of the writing itself and requires something to be
added in order to ascertain the meaning of the words used. In this case, parol evidence is not
admissible, otherwise the court would be creating a contract between the parties.

Intermediate Ambiguity

A situation where an ambiguity partakes of the nature of both patent and latent ambiguity. In this
case, while the words are seemingly clear and with a settled meaning, they are actually equivocal
and admit of two interpretations. Here, parol evidence is admissible to clarify the ambiguity
provided that the matter is put in issue by the pleader.(Regalado, p.734 citing 20 Am. Jur. 1011)
C. Validity of the written agreement

Parol evidence is admissible to show that the contract never existed on the ground of fraud, illegality or
incapacity of one of the parties.

D. The existence of other terms agreed to by the parties or their successors in interest after the execution
of the written agreement

Canuto claimed that two days before the expiration of the original redemption period, she asked Mariano
for an extension of time for the repurchase of the land and Mariano agreed. The Court held that the rule
forbidding the admission of parol or extrinsic evidence to alter, vary, or contradict a written instrument
does not apply so as to prohibit the establishment by parol of an agreement between the parties to a
writing, entered into subsequent to the time when the written instrument was executed.(Canuto V.
Mariano,G.R. No. L-11346, 1918)
Rule on Conditional Agreements

When the operation of the contract is made to depend upon the occurrence of an
event, which for that reason is a condition precedent, such may be established by
parol evidence. This is not varying the terms of the written contract by extrinsic
agreement for the simple reason that there is no contract in existence; there is
nothing to which to apply the excluding rule.

The second paragraph contained in the letter is a condition precedent, which states:
“This matter has been the subject of agreement between your husband and this
office.” When the operation of the contract is made to depend upon the occurrence of
an event, which, for that reason is a condition precedent, such may be established by
parole evidence.(Land Settlement and Development Corporation v. Garcia
Plantation, G.R.No.L-17820,1963)
Rule on Collateral Oral Agreements

A contract made prior to or contemporaneous with another agreement and if oral and not
inconsistent with the written contract is admissible within the exception to the parol
evidence rule. The parol evidence rule will not apply when the collateral oral agreement
refers to separate and distinct subjects.

Waiver of the parol evidence rule

The parol evidence rule can be waived by failure to invoke the benefits of the rule. This
waiver may be made by failure to object to the introduction of evidence aliunde.
Inadmissible evidence may be rendered admissible by failure to object (Santiago v.
Court of Appeals, 278 SCRA 98; Policarpio v. Court of Appeals, 194 SCRA 729).
Failure to object to the parol evidence presented by the adverse party operates as a
waiver of the protection of the parol evidence rule.
Probative value

1. Even if parol evidence is admitted, such admission would not mean that the court would give probative
value to the parol evidence. Admissibility is not the equivalent of probative value or credibility.

2. If The petitioner, for instance, claims that the parties had entered into a verbal agreement subsequent to the
written agreement, the existence of the verbal agreement must be sufficiently supported by evidence.

Distinguish: parol evidence rule and original document rule

Parol Evidence Rule

1.It presupposes that the,original document is,available in court

2. Precludes the admission of other evidence to prove the terms of an agreement other than the contents of the
agreement itself for the purpose of varying the terms of the writing.

3 .Can be invoked only by the parties to the document and their successors in interest.

4.Applies to written agreements (contracts)including wills.

Original Document Rule

1 .Establishes a preference for the original document or

secondary evidence thereof.

2 .Precludes the admission of secondary evidence if the original

document is available.

3 .Can be invoked by any litigant to an action whether or not

said litigant is a party to the document involved.

4 .Applies to all forms of writing.

Intrinsic ambiguity in the writing

1. An instance when evidence aliunde or parol evidence may be allowed to modify, explain or even add to the
written agreement is when an intrinsic ambiguity exists in the written agreement. It must be emphasized, however,
that the mere existence of an intrinsic ambiguity will not authorize the admission of parol evidence. It is very
important that the intrinsic ambiguity be put in issue in the party's pleading. It is the raising of the issue of intrinsic
ambiguity in the pleading which will authorize the introduction of parol evidence

Distinctions between the best evidence rule and the parol evidence rule

1. The best evidence rule establishes a preference for the original document over a secondary evidence thereof.
The parol evidence rule is not concerned with the primacy of evidence but presupposes that the original is
available

2. The best evidence rule precludes the admission of secondary evidence if the original document is available. The
parol evidence rule precludes the admission of other evidence to prove the terms of a document other than the
contents of the document itself for the purpose of varying the terms of the writing
3. The best evidence rule can be invoked by any
litigant to an action whether or not said litigant is a
party to the document involved. The parol evidence
rule can be invoked only by the parties to the document
and their successors-in-interest

4. The best evidence rule applies to all forms of

writing. The parol evidence rule applies to written
agreements (contracts), and “wills.”...e.
Authentication and Proof of Documents

Meaning of authentication.

1. The concept of “authentication" occupies a vital place in the presentation of evidence. Not
only objects but also documents introduced in evidence need to be authenticated. It is the
preliminary step in showing the admissibility of evidence.

For example, a weapon, let us say, a .38 revolver, is found in the crime scene. To be admissible in
evidence, it must be authenticated. This means that it must be shown to the satisfaction of the
court that the weapon is the very same weapon found in the crime scene. To convince the court,
the proponent of the evidence must call someone to identify the weapon and affirm: “This is the
weapon I found in the crime scene.” This someone could be the police investigator or someone
else who handled the evidence. When he affirms it is the same weapon, then the evidence is
authenticated.
2. Litigation always involves the authentication of either object or documentary evidence.
Unless a document is considered self-authenticating, it will not be admitted in evidence
without a prior authentication. The requirement for authentication of evidence discloses
the existence in the legal system of a legal presumption that is not, however, direct-ly
written in statutes or procedural rules but is necessarily implied therein. This presumption
is: That objects and docu-ments presented in evidence are, as a rule, counterfeit. In short,
the evidence presented in court is not presumed authentic. It is, therefore, incumbent
upon the proponent of the evidence to prove its authenticity.

3. Authentication of a private document does not require a seal. There shall be no

difference between sealed and unsealed private documents insofar as their admissibility
as evidence is concerned (Sec. 32, Rule 132, Rules of Court).
Public and private documents

1. Documents may either be public or private. This classification is for the purpose of their
presentation in evidence.

2. Sec.19 of Rule 132 enumerates the public documents, thus:

Classes of documents. - For the pur-pose of their presentation in evidence, documents are either public
or private.

Public documents are:

(a) The written official acts, or records of the official acts of the sovereign authority, official bodies
and tribunals, and public officers, whether of the Philip-pines, or of a foreign country;

(b) Documents acknowledged before a notary public except last wills and testaments; and

(c) Public records, kept in the Philippines, of private documents required by law to be entered therein.
Proof of private document. - Before any private document offered as authentic is received in evidence, its due execution and
authenticity must be proved either:

(a) By anyone who saw the document executed or written; or

(b) By evidence of the genuineness of the signature or handwriting of the maker.

Any other private document need only be identified as that which it is claimed to be.”

When authentication of private documents is not required

The requirement of authentication of a private document is excused in four instances, specifically:

(a) when the document is an ancient one within the context of Sec. 21, Rule 132 of the Rules of Court;

(b) when the genuineness and authenticity of an actionable document have not been specifically denied under oath by the adverse
party under Sec. 8 of Rule 8 of the Rules of Court;

(c) when the genuineness and authenticity of the document have been admitted under Sec. 4 of Rule 129; or

(d) when the document is not being offered as nuthontic as implied from Sec. 20, Rule 132 of the Rules of Court, which requires
authentication only when the document is offered as 'authentic' (See Patula v. People, 669 SCRA 135, 157, April 11, 2012).
Ancient documents

There is an exception to the rule requiring proof of the genuineness and due execution of a private
document. The exception is in the case of a private “ancient document.” A private document is considered
ancient when it is more than thirty (30) years old, is produced from a custody in which it would naturally
be found if genuine, and is unblemished by any alterations or circumstances of suspicion (Sec. 21,Rule
132, Rules ofCourt) (Bar 2011).

When a document is ancient pursuant to the descriptions in Sec. 21 of Rule 132, evidence of its
authenticity need not be given, i.e., there is no need to prove its genuineness and due execution. This
means that there is no necessity for observance of the authentication process under Sec. 20 such as the
testimony of a person who saw the document executed or by one who will show evidence of the
genuineness of the handwriting of the maker of the document. It must, however, be established first that
the document is ancient and that it has the characteristics of a document so provided under Sec. 21. When
all these are complied with, no other evidence of its authenticity need be given.
Proof of notarial documents. - Every instrument duly acknowledged or proved and certified as provided by
law, may be presented in evidence without further proof, the certificate of acknowledgement being prima
facie evidence of the execution of the instrument or document involved.”

Accordingly, a notarized instrument has in its favor 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 presump-tion, there must be clear and convincing evidence. Absent such
evidence, the presumption must be upheld.

Public documents as evidence

Under Sec. 23 of Rule 132, when a public officer, in the performance of his duty, makes an entry in the
public record, the document of such entry is deemed prima facie evidence of the facts stated in the entry.
However, in the case of other public documents,the facts stated therein constitute evidence of the facts that
gave rise to the execution of such documents and of the date of the execution of the same. Sec. 23 as quoted,
declares:
Public documents as evidence.-Documents consisting of
entries in public records made in the performance of a duty by
a public officer are prima facie evidence of the facts therein
stated. All other pub-lic documents are evidence, even against
a third per-son, of the fact which gave rise to their execution
and of the date of the latter.``

Irremovability of public record. -Any public record, an official

copy of which is admissible in evidence, must not be removed
from the office in which it is kept, except upon order of a court
where the inspec-tion of the record is essential to the just
determination of a pending case."
Public record of a private document

1. A public record of a private document may be proved by any of the following:

(a) By the original record; or

(b) 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, Rules of Court).

Proof of lack of record

A litigation does not always involve evidence of the existence of a record. Sometimes the issue centers on the
absence of an official record. How then may the absence of a record be proven?

Proof of lack of record of a document consists of a written statement signed by the officer having custody of an
official record or by his deputy. The written statement must contain the following matters:

(a) there has been a diligent search of the record;

(b) that despite the diligent search, no record of entry of a specified tenor is found to exist in the records of his
office.
Last wills and testaments

Last wills and testaments must undergo an authentication process even if they are
notarized in accordance with Art. 806 of the Civil Code of the Philippines. The Rules of
Court (Sec. 19[b], Rule 132), while declaring that the term “public document”includes
one acknowledged before a notary public, nevertheless expressly excludes last wills and
testaments. Besides, substantive law provides that no will shall pass either real or
personal property unless proved and allowed in the proper court (Art. 838, Civil Code of
the Philippines). The same substantive rule is echoed in Sec. 1 of Rule 75 which
provides:

“SECTION. 1. Allowance necessary. Conclusive as to execution. -No will pass either real
or personal estate unless it is proved and allowed in the proper court. Subject to the right
of appeal, such allowance of the will shall be conclusive as to its due
execution”(Underscoring supplied).
Explaining alterations in a document

The party producing the document as genuine but which bears alterations after its execution has the duty to
account for any alteration found in a document purported to be genuine. For such purpose, he may show any of the
following:

(a) that the alteration was made by another with-out his concurrence; or

(b) that the alteration was made with the consent of the parties affected by it;

(c) that the alteration was otherwise properly or innocently made; or

(d) that the alteration did not in anyway change the meaning or language of the instrument.

Proof of documents in an unofficial language

Because the rule provides that a document written in an unofficial language shall not be admitted as evidence, it
must be accompanied by a translation into English or Fili. pino. To avoid interruption of court proceedings,
attorneys are required to have such translation prepared before trial (Sec. 33, Rule 132, Rules of Court).

Impeachment of judicial record

1. A judicial record refers to the record of judicial proceedings (Black's Law Dictionary, 5th Ed., p. 762) It does
not only include official entries or files or the official acts of a judicial officer (Wharton's Criminal Evidence, 11th
Ed., §805), but also the judgment of the court (Black's Law Dictionary, p.762).

2. Sec. 29 of Rule 132 authorizes the impeachment of any judicial record if there be evidence of the existence of
any of the following grounds: (a) lack of jurisdiction in the court or judicial officer; (b) collusion between the
parties; or (c) fraud in the party offering the record, in respect to the proceedings.

Registration of contracts

1. Where a contract is required by law to be registered, the same must be, as a rule, in a public instrument. For
example, for purposes of registration and convenience, acts and contracts which have for their object the creation,
transmission, modification or extinguishment of real rights over immovable property must appear in a public
instrument (Art. 1358, Civil Code of the Philippines).

2. Certain contracts must be embodied in a public instrument in order to be valid. Examples: (a) A donation of an
immovable (Art. 749, Civil Code ofthe Philippines); (b) A donation of a movable with a value exceeding five
thousand pesos
Foreign judgments; divorces

Before a foreign judgment is given presumptive evidentiary value, the document must first be
presented and admitted in evidence. A divorce obtained abroad is proven by the divorce decree itself.
Indeed, the best evidence of a judgment is the judgment itself. The decree purports to be a written act
or record of an act of an official body or tribunal of a foreign country.

Under Secs. 24 and 25 of Rule 132, on the other hand, a writing or document may be proven as a
public or official record of a foreign country by either (1) an official publication or (2) a copy thereof
attested by the officer having legal custody of the document. If the record is not kept in the
Philippines, such copy must be (a) accompanied by a certificate issued by the proper diplomatic or
consular officer in the Philippine foreign service stationed in the foreign country in which the record
is kept, and (b) authenticated by the sea1 of his office (Vda. De Catalan v. Catalan-Lee, 665 SCRA
487, 495, February 8, 2012).
Church registries

It is well-settled that church registries of births, marriages, and deaths made

subsequent to the promulgation of General Orders No. 68, promulgated on
December 18, 1889, and the passage of Act No. 190, enacted on August 7,
1901, are no longer public writings, nor are they kept by duly authorized
public officials. They are private writings and their authenticity must therefore
be proved, as are all other private writings in accordance with the Rules of
Evidence (Llemos v. Llemos, 513 SCRA 128) (Bar 2011)