Notes for Amendment:

CODAL BREAKDOWN • Even without the word “Constitution”, it has been

REVISED RULES ON EVIDENCE recognized the exclusions envisaged by the 1987
Constitution.
• In the Constitution, there are basic rights that may affect
the admissibility of evidence, such as those covered by the
RULE 128 Bill of Rights (e.g., illegal search and seizure and evidence
General Provisions seized, right against self-incrimination, statements during
custodial investigation which was not assisted by
competent counsel, chain of custody in drugs cases, etc.)
Section 1. Evidence defined. —

Evidence is the means, sanctioned by these rules, of Section 4. Relevancy; collateral matters. —
ascertaining in a judicial proceeding the truth respecting
a matter of fact. (1) Evidence must have such a relation to the fact in issue
as to induce belief in its existence or non-existence.

Section 2. Scope. — Evidence on collateral matters shall not be allowed,

except when it tends in any reasonable degree to
The rules of evidence shall be the same in all courts and establish the probability or improbability of the fact in
in all trials and hearings, except as otherwise provided by issue. (4)
law or these rules. (2)
Discussions:

• Relevant Evidence
Section 3. Admissibility of evidence. —
Relevant evidence is any class of evidence which has 'rational
Evidence is admissible probative value' to the issue in controversy.
• when it is relevant to the issue and
• is not excluded by Logic and human experience teach us that OCULAR
o the Constitution, INSPECTION (NOT the Certificate of Registration, development
o the law of these rules. (3) permit, license to sell, building permit, and Condominium
Certificate of Title) is the best evidence to prove the existence

CODAL BREAKDOWN AND DISCUSSION | REVISED RULES ON EVIDENCE | JAFRANCISCO 1

or non-existence of condominium units. (OCA v. Judge Lerma, guidelines provided by the rules of evidence.” (Id., citing De
A.M. No. RTJ-07- 2076, October 18, 2010) Guzman v. Tumolva, G.R. No. 188072, October 19, 2011)

• Competent Evidence RULE 129

What Need Not Be Proved
Competent evidence is evidence that is not excluded by the
Constitution, the law or the rules.

Marriage may be proven by any competent and relevant Section 1. Judicial notice, when mandatory. — A court
evidence. Testimony of one of the parties to the marriage, or shall take judicial notice, without the introduction of
one of the witnesses to the marriage, or the solemnizing officer, evidence,
are admissible to prove the fact of marriage. xxx the best • of the existence and territorial extent of states,
documentary evidence of a marriage is the marriage contract their political history, forms of government and
itself. (Uy v. Spouses Lacsamana, G. R. No. 206220, August 19, 2015) symbols of nationality,
• the law of nations,
Relevant + Competent = Admissible • the admiralty and maritime courts of the world and
their seals,
Note: Admissibility of Evidence is NOT Weight of Evidence • the political constitution and history of the
(RULE 133) + Credibility Philippines,
• the official acts of legislative, executive and judicial
“The admissibility of evidence depends on its relevance and
competence, while the weight of evidence pertains to evidence
departments of the National Government of the
already admitted and its tendency to convince and persuade.” Philippines,
(Mancol, Jr. v. Development Bank of the Philippines, G.R. No. 204289, • the laws of nature,
November 22, 2017, citing Dela Liana v. Biong, G.R. No. 182356, • the measure of time, and
December 4, 2013) • the geographical divisions. (1a)
"Admissibility refers to the question of whether certain pieces Notes for Amendment:
of evidence are to be considered at all, while probative value
The phrase “national government of the Philippines” clarifies
refers to the question of whether the admitted evidence proves
that the official acts referred to in the provision are those of
an issue." (Id., citing Lepanto Consolidated Mining Co. v. Dumapis,
the legislative, executive and judicial departments of the
et al., G.R. No. 163210, August 13, 2008)
national government of the Philippines. This is to further clarify
questions as regards to local government units. (SOURCE:
"Thus, a particular item of evidence may be admissible, but its
Explanatory Notes, 2019 Proposed Amendments to the Revised Rules
evidentiary weight depends on judicial evaluation within the on Evidence)

CODAL BREAKDOWN AND DISCUSSION | REVISED RULES ON EVIDENCE | JAFRANCISCO 2

A court will take judicial notice of its own acts and records in shall hear the parties to be heard thereon if such matter is
the same case, of facts established in prior proceedings in the decisive of a material issue in the case. (3a)
same case, of the authenticity of its own records of another
case between the same parties, of the files of related cases in Notes for Amendment:
the same court, and of public records on file in the same court. • The amendment in Sec. 3 recognizes, among others, the
Since a copy of the tax declaration, which is a public record, judicial notice may be announced also during the pre-trial.
was attached to the complaint, the same document is already • Also, the court may motu proprio or upon motion”, instead
considered as on file with the court, thus, the court can now of “on request”, hear the parties on giving a matter judicial
take judicial notice of such. (Bangko Sentral ng Pilipinas v. Legaspi, notice; Use of the word “motion” – The word “motion” is
G.R. No. 205966, March 2, 2016)
more apt or accurate than “request.”
• The amendment in the same section removed the phrase
“After the trial”, which actually involves proceedings
Section 2. Judicial notice, when discretionary. — “before judgment”
• Further, the use of the terms “motu proprio” and “upon
A court may take judicial notice of matters which are motion” are consistent with the use thereof in the 1st par.
• of public knowledge, or of Sec. 3.
• are capable to unquestionable demonstration, or • Inclusion of the word “pre-trial” – The court may properly
• ought to be known to judges because of their indicate to the parties its intention, or the parties may
judicial functions. (2) request the court, to take judicial notice of a particular
matter during pre-trial.
• Use of the phrase “on the propriety of taking” – The phrase
Section 3. Judicial notice, when hearing necessary. — was added to provide clarification on the purpose of the
hearing, i.e., whether the matter involved is a proper subject
During the pre-trial and the trial, the court, of a discretionary judicial notice. (SOURCE: Explanatory
• motu proprio, or Notes, 2019 Proposed Amendments to the Revised Rules on
• upon motion, Evidence)
shall hear the parties on the propriety of taking judicial
notice of any matter. The classification of the land is obviously essential to the
valuation of the subject property, which is the very issue in the
present case. The parties should thus have been given the
Before judgment or on appeal, the court,
opportunity to present evidence on the nature of the property
• motu proprio or before the lower court took judicial notice of the commercial
• upon motion, nature of a portion of the subject landholdings. (Land Bank of the
may take judicial notice of any matter and Philippines v. Honeycomb Farms, Inc., G.R. No. 166259, November
12, 2012)

CODAL BREAKDOWN AND DISCUSSION | REVISED RULES ON EVIDENCE | JAFRANCISCO 3

Section 4. Judicial admissions. — is well-settled that judicial admissions cannot be contradicted
by the admitter who is the party himself and binds the person
An admission, who makes the same, and absent any showing that this was
made thru palpable mistake, as in this case, no amount of
• oral or
rationalization can offset it. Also, in Republic of the Philippines
• written,
v. De Guzman, citing Alfelor v. Halasan, this Court held that ‘a
made by the party in the course of the proceedings in the party who judicially admits a fact cannot later challenge that
same case, does not require proof. fact as judicial admissions are a waiver of proof; production of
evidence is dispensed with. A judicial admission also removes
The admission may be contradicted only an admitted fact from the field of controversy.’” (Tan v. People,
• by showing that it was made through G.R. No. 218902, October 17, 2016)
o palpable mistake or
o that the imputed admission was not, in fact,
made. (4a) RULE 130
Rules of Admissibility
Notes for Amendment:
• Use of the word “oral” – The term “verbal,” as used in the
old provision, refers to the use of words, which can either A. OBJECT (REAL) EVIDENCE
be oral or written. Thus, the word “oral” is the more apt term
to be used together with the word “written.”
Section 1. Object as evidence. —
• Also, the “imputed admission” simply refers to the “judicial
admission”
• A “judicial admission” not “in fact” made is just stressing Objects as evidence are those addressed to the senses
the point. of the court.
• Use of the phrase “the imputed...was not, in fact, made”
– From the Sub- Committee’s version “that the imputed When an object is relevant to the fact in issue, it may be
admission was not made or intended,” the Rules exhibited to, examined or viewed by the court. (1)
Committee opted to be more objective, noting that
“intended” is a condition of the mind. (SOURCE: Explanatory Physical evidence ranks higher in hierarchy of trustworthy
Notes, 2019 Proposed Amendments to the Revised Rules on evidence. When physical evidence runs counter to witness'
Evidence) testimony, the primacy of the physical evidence must be
upheld. In criminal cases xxx in which the accused stand to
“A party may make judicial admissions in (a) the pleadings, (b) lose their liberty if found guilty, the Court has [to] rely principally
during the trial, either by verbal or written manifestations or
stipulations, or (c) in other stages of the judicial proceeding. It
CODAL BREAKDOWN AND DISCUSSION | REVISED RULES ON EVIDENCE | JAFRANCISCO 4
upon physical evidence in ascertaining the truth. (PO1 Ocampo Notes for Amendment:
v. People, G.R. No. 194129, June 15, 2015) Expanded definition of documentary evidence
• Taken from the Federal Rules of Evidence (FRE) and Rule
A person's appearance, as evidence of age (for example, of 1001 of the Uniform Rules of Evidence (URE) by American
infancy, or of being under the age of consent to intercourse), is Bar Association.
admissible as object evidence, the same being addressed to • The purpose of expanding the definition is to embrace in
the senses of the court. (People v. Rullepa, G.R. No. 131516, March the broadest possible terms every memorial that preserves
2003) written and spoken language, including recorded sounds.
• The inclusion of “photographs include still pictures, stored
B. DOCUMENTARY EVIDENCE images, x-ray films, videotapes, and motion pictures”
should be construed as merely exemplary, and NOT
Section 2. Documentary evidence. — exclusive (Mueller & Kirkpatrick, Modern Evidence, Section 10.2
[1995])
Documents as evidence consist of
• writings, Photographs as documentary evidence
• In Sison v. People, G.R. Nos. 108280-83, 16 November 1995;
• recordings,
College Assurance Plan v. Belfrant Development, G.R. No.
• photographs or 155604, 22 November 2007; People v. Zeta, G.R. No. 178541, 27
• any material containing May 2008, the Supreme Court allowed the use of
o letters, photographs as documentary evidence because they are
o words, relevant to the issue and are verified. The verification need
o sounds, not be made by the photographer himself; it can be
o numbers, made by any other competent witness who can testify as
o figures, to its exactness and accuracy.
o symbols or their equivalent, or
o other modes of written expression offered Use of the word “videos” instead of “videotapes” –
“Videos” is the more modern term
as proof of their contents.
• Use of the word “drawings” – In Seiler v. Lucasfilm, Ltd. (808
Photographs include still F.2d 1316 [9th Cir. 1987]), the US Court of Appeals for the
• pictures, Ninth Circuit held that “drawings” were “writings” within the
• drawings, meaning of the best evidence rule, specifically, Rule 1001,
• stored images, FRE. (SOURCE: Explanatory Notes, 2019 Proposed
• x-ray films, Amendments to the Revised Rules on Evidence)
• motion pictures, or
• videos. (2a)
CODAL BREAKDOWN AND DISCUSSION | REVISED RULES ON EVIDENCE | JAFRANCISCO 5
Note: Electronic documents as functional equivalent of paper- § the original cannot be obtained by local judicial
based documents. – Whenever a rule of evidence refers to the processes or procedures;
term writing, document, record, instrument, memorandum or
any other form of writing, such term shall be deemed to include (c) When the original consists of
an electronic document as defined in these Rules. (Sec. 1, Rule
§ numerous accounts or
3, Rules on Electronic Evidence)
§ other documents which cannot be examined in
1. Original Document Rule court without great loss of time
AND the fact sought to be established from them is only
the general result of the whole;
Section 3. Original document must be produced;
exceptions. —
(d) When the original is a public record
§ in the custody of a public officer or
When the subject of inquiry is the contents of a
§ is recorded in a public office; and
• document,
• writing,
(e) When the original is not closely-related to a controlling
• recording,
issue. (3a)
• photograph or other record,
no evidence is admissible other than the original
The rule is that “no evidence is admissible other than original
document itself, except in the following cases: document itself” the exception applies if, aside from the
document itself, the “writing, recording, photograph or other
(a) When the original is record”, cannot be presented.
• lost or destroyed, or
• cannot be produced in court, • The “Best Evidence Rule” (BER) is a misnomer because it
without bad faith on the part of the offeror; misleadingly suggests that the doctrine applies to all types
of evidence. BER only applies to documents or writings. As
(b) When the original is such, there is no requirement that parties introduce the best
available evidence bearing on other matters that they seek
• in the custody or
to prove in court.
• under the control of the party against whom the
• The doctrine simply requires that the original be produced
evidence is offered, when the subject of inquiry is the contents of a document
§ AND the latter fails to produce it after reasonable and excludes secondary evidence except where the
notice, or original is shown to be unavailable or secondary evidence
is otherwise allowed by the rule or statute.

CODAL BREAKDOWN AND DISCUSSION | REVISED RULES ON EVIDENCE | JAFRANCISCO 6

• The “Original Document Rule” is thus the more accurate • Item (e) is a new provision wherein as another exception
or apt label for the doctrine. (SOURCE: Explanatory Notes, is when the original is not closely-related to a controlling
2019 Proposed Amendments to the Revised Rules on Evidence) issue.
o Ratio: Remember that under Rule 128, Sec. 4, that
Best Evidence Rule collateral matters are considered inadmissible as a
• With respect to documentary evidence, the best evidence general rule for the simple reason that relevance is one
rule applies only when the content of such document is the of the primordial elements of an admissible evidence
subject of the inquiry. Where the issue is only as to whether except when it tends in any reasonable degree to
such document was actually executed, or exists, or on the establish the probability or improbability of the fact in
circumstances relevant to or surrounding its execution, the issue. Therefore when the original document cannot be
best evidence rule does not apply and testimonial evidence brought to the court and that document is not closely-
is admissible. (Republic v. Spouses Gimenez, G.R. No. 174673, related to a controlling issue, then the court must
January 11, 2016; Scunac Corporation v. Sylianteng, G.R. No. consider substitutionary evidence.
205879, April 23, 2014) • The additional exception “or the original cannot be
• The primary purpose of the Best Evidence Rule is to obtained by judicial process or procedure”
ensure that the exact contents of a writing are brought o In Philippine National Bank v. Olalia (No. L-8189, 23
before the court xxx. The rule further acts as an insurance March 1956; 98 Phil. 1002, unreported), the Supreme
against fraud. Verily, if a party is in the possession of the Court ruled that when the original is outside the
best evidence and withholds it, and seeks to substitute jurisdiction of the court, as when it is in a foreign
inferior evidence in its place, the presumption naturally country, secondary evidence is admissible. (See also
arises that the better evidence is withheld for fraudulent Chartered Bank of India, Australia & China v. Tuliarmo, 51
purposes that its production would expose and defeat. O.G.5211.)
Lastly, the rule protects against misleading inferences • The additional exception “[w]hen the original is not
resulting from the intentional or unintentional introduction closely-related to a controlling issue” -
of selected portions of a larger set of writings. (Heirs of o Known in the US as an exception for “collateral
Prodon v. Heirs of Alvarez, G.R. No. 170604, September 2, 2013) matter,” this amendment is intended to prevent an
overly rigid or technical application of the original
Notes for Amendment: document rule. It allows for trial efficiency where the
• No amendment in items (c) and (d) in the exceptions, while original is so tangential that its production would add
there is only a minor amendment in item (a) little or nothing to the reliability of the fact-finding
• The amendment in item (b) includes, as an exception, a process. (Mueller & Kirkpatrick, Modern Evidence,
situation wherein the original of a document, writing, Section 10.2 [1995]) (SOURCE: Explanatory Notes, 2019
recording, photograph or other record cannot be obtained Proposed Amendments to the Revised Rules on Evidence)
by judicial processes

CODAL BREAKDOWN AND DISCUSSION | REVISED RULES ON EVIDENCE | JAFRANCISCO 7

Section 4. Original of document. — (c) A duplicate is admissible to the same extent as an
original unless
(a) An "original” of a document is (1) a genuine question is raised as to the
§ the document itself or authenticity of the original, or
§ any counterpart (2) in the circumstances, it is unjust or inequitable
intended to have the same effect by a person to admit the duplicate in lieu of the original. (4a)
executing or issuing it.
Notes for Amendment:
An "original” of a photograph includes the negative or • This item (a) is a new provision. The amendment defines
any print therefrom. what an original document is, which is the document itself
or any counterpart intended to have the same effect. It did
If data is stored in a computer or similar device, not modify the meaning of an original document in the
previous rules. Also, it provides that an original of a
§ any printout or
photograph includes the negative or any print therefrom.
§ other output readable by sight or Further, the data stored in a computer or similar device,
§ other means, shown to reflect the data when printed, is also an original. Even as amended, the
accurately, term "original" does not necessarily mean the first writing,
is an "original." recording or photograph that was made, but rather refers
to the writing, recording, or photograph that is in issue in
(b) A "duplicate" is a the litigation.
§ counterpart produced by o The inclusion of any output from a computer adopts Section
o the same impression as the 1, Rule 4 of the Rules on Electronic Evidence (REE).
• This item (b) is a new provision. The definition of a
§ original, or
“duplicate” is more detailed, it pertains to a counterpart
§ from the same matrix, or
produced (i) by the same impression as the original, or (ii)
o by means of photography, including from the same matrix, or (iii) by means of photography, or
§ enlargements and miniatures, or (iv) by mechanical or electronic recording, (v) by chemical
o by mechanical or electronic re- reproduction, or (vi) by other equivalent techniques.
recording, or o It follows Section 2, Rule 4 of the REE, which was adopted
o by chemical reproduction, or from the FRE.
o by other equivalent techniques which o The purpose of this amendment is to eliminate best
evidence objections to copies made in clearly reliable ways,
accurately reproduce the original. except where the objecting party can offer a good reason to
support the production of the original as indicated by the new
Section 4 (c).

CODAL BREAKDOWN AND DISCUSSION | REVISED RULES ON EVIDENCE | JAFRANCISCO 8

• This item (c) is a new provision. The new Section 4 (c) is A VAT invoice is the seller's best proof of the sale of goods
based on Section 2, Rule 4 of the REE. or services to the buyer, while a VAT receipt is the buyer's
• As a general rule, the admissibility of a duplicate is allowed best evidence of the payment of goods or services received
to the same extent as an original, except if from the seller. A VAT invoice and a VAT receipt should not
(1) a genuine question is raised as to the authenticity of be confused and made to refer to one and the same thing.
the original or (Northern Mindanao Power Corporation v. CIR, G.R. No. 185115,
(2) it is unjust or inequitable to admit the duplicate”. February 18, 2015)

What are the types of Original Document?

2. Secondary Evidence
a) Documents where its contents are the subject of inquiry
– still retained Section 5. When original document is unavailable. —
When what is being questioned is the authenticity and due When the original document
execution of a deed of sale and there is no real issue as to
§ has been lost or destroyed, or
its contents, the best evidence rule is inapplicable. (Skunac
Corporation v. Sylianteng, G.R. No. 205879, April 23, 2014) § cannot be produced in court,
the offeror, upon proof of its execution or existence
b) Duplicate original – still retained and the cause of its unavailability without bad faith
on his or her part, may prove
When carbon sheets are inserted between two or more § its contents by a copy, or
sheets of writing paper so that the writing of a contract § by a recital of its contents in some authentic
upon the outside sheet, xxx, produces a facsimile upon the document, or
sheets beneath, such signature being thus reproduced by § by the testimony of witnesses in the order
the same stroke of pen which made the surface or exposed
stated. (5a) *hierarchy for purposes of giving weight.
impression, all sheets are regarded as duplicate originals.
(Capital Shoes Factory, Ltd. v. Traveler Kids, Inc., G.R. No.
200065, Sept. 14, 2014) The offeror must prove:
a) existence or due execution of the original;
c) Entry is repeated in the regular course of business, one b) loss/destruction of original or reason for non-production;
being copied from another at or near the time of the c) absence of bad faith on the part of the offeror;
transaction, all entries are regarded as originals – still d) Order of proof is: existence, execution, loss, and contents.
(MCMP Construction Corp. v. Monark Equipment Corp., G.R. No.
retained (under the new Section 7)
201001, November 10, 2014)

CODAL BREAKDOWN AND DISCUSSION | REVISED RULES ON EVIDENCE | JAFRANCISCO 9

Section 6. When original document is in adverse party's • AND cannot be examined in court without great loss
custody or control. — of time,
• AND the fact sought to be established is only the
If the document is in the general result of the whole,
• custody or the contents of such evidence may be presented in
• under the control the form of a
of adverse party, § chart,
he or she must have reasonable § summary, or
notice to produce it. § calculation.
The originals shall be available for
If § examination or
• after such notice and § copying,
• after satisfactory proof of its existence, § or both,
he or she fails to produce the document, by the adverse party at a reasonable time and place.
secondary evidence may be presented
as in the case of its loss. (6a) The court may order that they be produced in court. (n)

The offeror must prove: Notes for Amendment:

(a) the original exists; • This new provision is substantially taken from Rule 1006 of
(b) document is under the custody or control of adverse party the FRE, although the requirement that the records must be
(c) adverse party given reasonable notice to produce original voluminous under Section 3 (c), Rule 130 of the Revised
(d) adverse party failed to produce original despite notice. Rules on n Evidence was retained.
(EDSAShangri-la Hotel and Resort v. BF Corp., G.R. No. • As early as 1977, the Supreme Court, in Compaña Maritima
145842, June 27, 2008) v. Allied Free Workers’ Union, 167 Phil. 381, already held
that the originals must be made available to the adverse
Section 7. Summaries – party. (SOURCE: Explanatory Notes, 2019 Proposed
Amendments to the Revised Rules on Evidence)
• It pertains to “voluminous” evidence that cannot be
When the contents of examined in court without great loss of time, so the
§ documents, contents thereof may be presented in the form of a chart,
§ records, summary or calculation
§ photographs, or • Also, the “voluminous” evidence must be available to the
§ numerous accounts are voluminous adverse party for examination or copying

CODAL BREAKDOWN AND DISCUSSION | REVISED RULES ON EVIDENCE | JAFRANCISCO 10

Section 8. Evidence admissible when original document However, a party may present evidence to
is a public record. — § modify,
§ explain or
When the original of a document is § add to the terms of written agreement
§ in the custody of public officer or if he puts in issue in a verified pleading:
§ is recorded in a public office,
its contents may be proved by a certified copy issued by (a) An intrinsic ambiguity, mistake or imperfection in the
the public officer in custody thereof. (7) written agreement;

Section 9. Party who calls for document not bound to (b) The failure of the written agreement to express the true
offer it. — intent and agreement of the parties thereto;

A party who calls for the production of a document and (c) The validity of the written agreement; or
inspects the same is not obliged to offer it as evidence.
(8) (d) The existence of other terms agreed to by the parties
or their successors in interest after the execution of
3. Parol Evidence Rule the written agreement.

Section 10. Evidence of written agreements. — The term "agreement" includes wills. (7a)

§ When the terms of an agreement have been reduced Notes for Amendments:
to writing, • No substantial amendment in the third paragraph of Sec.
o it is considered as containing all the terms 10, aside from the gender-based amendment, inserted was
word “verified” when referring to the required pleading to
agreed upon and there can be,
“modify explain or add to the terms of a written agreement”
§ as between the parties and their
successors in interest, Oral testimony, of person who has an interest in the outcome
• no evidence of such terms other of the case, in lieu of documentary evidence may be admitted
than the contents of the written as evidence, provided:
agreement. a) the existence of any of the following has been put in issue
in a party's pleading or has not been objected to by the
adverse party:

CODAL BREAKDOWN AND DISCUSSION | REVISED RULES ON EVIDENCE | JAFRANCISCO 11

 1. intrinsic ambiguity, mistake or imperfection in the 4. Interpretation Of Documents
agreement;
2. failure of agreement to express true intent of the parties; Section 11. Interpretation of a writing according to its
3. validity of agreement;
legal meaning. —
4. existence of other terms agreed to after execution of the
agreement.
b) it serves as the basis of the conclusion proposed by the
The language of a writing is to be interpreted according to
presenting party. (Spouses Paras v. Kimwa Construction and the legal meaning it bears in the place of its execution,
Development Corporation, G.R. No. 171601, April 8, 2015) unless the parties intended otherwise. (10)

• The issue of admitting parol evidence is a matter that is Section 12. Instrument construed so as to give effect to
proper to the trial, not the appellate, stage of a case. (Sps. all provisions. —
Abella v. Sps. Abella, G.R. No. 195166, July 8, 2015)
• This rule is animated by a perceived wisdom in deferring to
In the construction of an instrument, where there are
the contracting parties’ articulated intent. In choosing to
reduce their agreement into writing, they are deemed to several provisions or particulars, such a construction is, if
have done so meticulously and carefully, employing possible, to be adopted as will give effect to all. (11)
specific — frequently, even technical — language as are
appropriate to their context. From an evidentiary Section 13. Interpretation according to intention; general
standpoint, this is also because "oral testimony . . . coming and particular provisions. —
from a party who has an interest in the outcome of the
case, depending exclusively on human memory, is not as In the construction of an instrument, the intention of the
reliable as written or documentary evidence. Spoken parties is to be pursued; and
words could be notoriously unreliable unlike a written
contract which speaks of a uniform language.” (Spouses
Paras v. Kimwa Construction and Development Corporation, when a general and a particular provision are
G.R. No. 171601, April 8, 2015) inconsistent, the latter is paramount to the former.

So a particular intent will control a general one that is

inconsistent with it. (12)

CODAL BREAKDOWN AND DISCUSSION | REVISED RULES ON EVIDENCE | JAFRANCISCO 12

Section 14. Interpretation according to circumstances. — o the evidence of persons skilled in
deciphering the characters, or
For the proper construction of an instrument, the o who understand the language,
circumstances under which it was made, including the is admissible to declare the characters or
situation of the subject thereof and of the parties to it, may the meaning of the language. (16)
be shown, so that the judge may be placed in the position
of those who language he or she is to interpret. (13) Section 18. Of Two constructions, which preferred. —

Section 15. Peculiar signification of terms. — When the terms of an agreement have been intended in a
different sense by the different parties to it,
The terms of a writing are presumed to have been used • that sense is to prevail against either party in which
in their primary and general acceptation, but evidence he or she supposed the other understood it, and
is admissible to show that they have a • when different constructions of a provision are
§ local, otherwise equally proper,
§ technical, or that is to be taken which is the most favorable to the party
§ otherwise peculiar signification, in whose favor the provision was made. (17)
and were so used and understood in the particular
instance, in which case the agreement must be construed Section 19. Construction in favor of natural right. —
accordingly. (14)
When an instrument is equally susceptible of two
Section 16. Written words control printed. — interpretations, one in favor of natural right and the
other against it, the former is to be adopted. (18)
When an instrument consists partly of written words and
partly of a printed form, and the two are inconsistent, Section 20. Interpretation according to usage. —
the former controls the latter. (15)
An instrument may be construed according to usage, in
Section 17. Experts and interpreters to be used in order to determine its true character. (19)
explaining certain writings. —

When the characters in which an instrument is written are

• difficult to be deciphered, or
• the language is not understood by the court,
CODAL BREAKDOWN AND DISCUSSION | REVISED RULES ON EVIDENCE | JAFRANCISCO 13
 C. TESTIMONIAL EVIDENCE of child witnesses were treated in the past has long been
erased. Under the Rule on Examination of a Child Witness (A.M.
No. 004-07-SC), every child is now presumed qualified to be a
1. Qualification of Witnesses
witness. (People v. Esugon, G.R. No. 195244, 22 June 2015)

Section 21. Witnesses; their qualifications.

Section 22. Testimony confined to personal knowledge. –
All persons who can
• perceive, and perceiving,
A witness can testify only to those facts which he or
• can make their known perception to others,
she knows of his or her personal knowledge;
may be witnesses. (20a)
• that is, which are derived from his or her own
perception. (36a)
• Religious or political belief,
• Interest in the outcome of the case, or
• conviction of a crime OLD CONCEPT OF HEARSAY
unless otherwise provided by law, • testimony that is not based on one’s personal knowledge,
shall not be ground for disqualification. (20) nor derived from one’s own perception

NEW CONCEPT AS LACK OF FIRSTHAND KNOWLEDGE

[Sec. 21. Disqualification by reason of mental • a witness can testify only as to facts of his or her personal
incapacity or immaturity – DELETED] knowledge or derived from his or her own perception

INDEPENDENTLY RELEVANT STATEMENT

Note: • statement relating what another individual told the
Mental retardation per se does not affect credibility if the declarant
testimony is coherent. A mentally retarded may be a credible • admissible proof based on firsthand knowledge of what the
witness. The acceptance of her testimony depends on the other individual told the declarant: not hearsay
quality of her perceptions and the manner she can make them • Inadmissible as proof of the truth of the statement of the
known to the court. (People v. Monticalvo, G.R. No. 193507, Jan. other individual to the declarant
30, 2013)
Lack of Firsthand Knowledge
That the witness is a child cannot be the sole reason for Evidence is hearsay when its probative force depends in
disqualification. The dismissiveness with which the testimonies whole or in part on the competency and credibility of some

CODAL BREAKDOWN AND DISCUSSION | REVISED RULES ON EVIDENCE | JAFRANCISCO 14

persons other than the witness by whom it is sought to subject to exceptions involving a civil case filed by one
produce. *old concept of hearsay spouse against the other or in a criminal case committed
by one spouse against the other or the latter’s direct
However, while the testimony of a witness regarding a descendants or ascendants;
statement made by another person given for the purpose of • Testifying for the other without consent has been deleted
establishing the truth of the fact asserted in the statement is in the amended rules.
clearly hearsay evidence, it is otherwise if the purpose of
placing the statement on the record is merely to establish the The reasons given for the rule are:
fact that the statement, or the tenor of such statement, was a) There is identity of interests between husband and wife;
made. Regardless of the truth or falsity of a statement, when b) If one were to testify for or against the other, there is
what is relevant is the fact that such statement has been made, consequent danger of perjury;
the hearsay rule does not apply and the statement may be c) The policy of the law is to guard the security and
shown. As a matter of fact, evidence as to the making of the confidences of private life, even at the risk of an occasional
statement is not secondary but primary, for the statement failure of justice, and to prevent domestic disunion and
itself may constitute a fact in issue or is circumstantially unhappiness; and
relevant as to the existence of such a fact. This is known as d) Where there is want of domestic tranquility there is danger
the doctrine of independently relevant statements. (Espineli of punishing one spouse through the hostile testimony of
v. People, G.R. No. 179535, June 9, 2014, citing Republic v. Heirs of the other. (Alvarez v. Ramirez, G.R. No. 143439, October 14,
Felipe Alejaga, G.R. No. 146030, December 3, 2002) 2005)

Section 23. Disqualification by reason of marriage. — Thus, where the marital and domestic relations are so strained
that there is no more harmony to be preserved nor peace and
During their marriage, the husband or the wife or against tranquility which may be disturbed, the reason based upon
such harmony and tranquility fails. In such a case, identity of
the other without the consent of the affected spouse,
interests disappears and the consequent danger of perjury
except based on that identity is non-existent. Likewise, in such a
• in a civil case by one against the other, or situation, the security and confidences of private life, which the
• in a criminal case for a crime committed by one law aims at protecting, will be nothing but ideals, which through
against the other or their absence, merely leave a void in the unhappy home. There
• the latter's direct descendants or ascendants. is therefore no reason to apply the Marital Disqualification Rule.
(22a) (Id.)

Note:
• The amendment in Sec. 23 is that it made clear that the
husband or the wife “cannot” testify against each other,
CODAL BREAKDOWN AND DISCUSSION | REVISED RULES ON EVIDENCE | JAFRANCISCO 15
Section 24. Disqualification by reason of privileged o be examined, without the consent of
communication. — the client and his employer,
§ concerning any fact the
The following persons cannot testify as to matters learned knowledge of which has been
in confidence in the following cases: acquired in such capacity except
in the following cases;
(a) The husband or the wife, during or after the marriage,
cannot be examined without the consent of the other
• as to any communication received in (i). Furtherance of crime or fraud. If the services
confidence by one from the other during the or advice of the lawyer were sought or obtained
marriage except to enable or aid anyone to commit or plan to
o in a civil case by one against the other, commit what the client knew or reasonably
or should have known to be a crime or fraud;
o in a criminal case for a crime committed
by one against the other or (ii). Claimants through same deceased client. As
o the latter's direct descendants or to a communication relevant to an issue
ascendants; between parties who claim through the same
deceased client, regardless of whether the
(b) An attorney or person reasonably believed by the claims are by testate or intestate or by inter
client to be licensed to engage in the practice of law vivos transaction;
cannot, without the consent of his client,
• be examined as to any communication made by (iii). Breach of duty by lawyer or client. As to a
the client to him or her, or communication relevant to an issue of breach
• his or her advice given thereon in the course of, of duty by the lawyer to his or her client, or by
or with a view to, the client to his or her lawyer;
o professional employment,
NOR can an (iv). Document attested by the lawyer. As to a
• attorney's secretary, communication relevant to an issue concerning
• stenographer, or an attested document to which the lawyer is an
• clerk, or attesting witness; or
• other persons assisting the attorney

CODAL BREAKDOWN AND DISCUSSION | REVISED RULES ON EVIDENCE | JAFRANCISCO 16

 (v). Joint clients. As to a communication relevant patient under the direction of the physician or
to a matter of common interest between two or psychotherapist.
more clients if the communication was made by
any of them to a lawyer retained or consulted in A “psychotherapist” is:
common, when offered in an action between i. A person licensed to practice medicine
any of the clients, unless they have expressly engaged in the diagnosis or treatment of
agreed otherwise. a mental or emotional condition, or
ii. A person licensed as a psychologist by
(c) A the government while similarly engaged.
• physician,
• psychotherapist or (d) A
• person reasonably believed by the patient to • minister,
be authorized to practice medicine or • priest or
psychotherapy • person reasonably believed to be so
cannot in a civil case, without the consent of the cannot, without the consent of the 'affected person,
patient, • be examined as to any communication or
• be examined as to any confidential • confession made to or
communication made for the purpose of • any advice given by him or her, in his or her
o diagnosis or professional character,
o treatment of the patient's o in the course of discipline enjoined by
§ physical, the church to which the minister or
§ mental or priest belongs.
§ emotional condition, including
• alcohol or (e) A public officer cannot
• drug addiction, • be examined during his term of office or
between the patient and his or her physician or afterwards,
psychotherapist. o as to communications made to him or
her in official confidence,
This privilege also applies to persons, including § when the court finds that the
members of the patient's family, who have public interest would suffer by the
participated in the diagnosis or treatment of the disclosure. (24a)

CODAL BREAKDOWN AND DISCUSSION | REVISED RULES ON EVIDENCE | JAFRANCISCO 17

Attorney – Client Privilege Crime or fraud (“future crime-fraud exception”)
(NOTE: As amended, the rule now admits of exceptions) The rationale for this exception is that clients are not entitled to
use lawyers to help them in pursuing unlawful or fraudulent
A communication is absolutely privileged when it is not objectives. If the privilege were to cloak such activity, the result
actionable, even if the author has acted in bad faith. This class would be loss of public confidence and corruption of the
includes allegations or statements made by parties or their profession. (Mueller & Kirkpatrick, Modern Evidence, Section
counsel in pleadings or motions or during the hearing of judicial 5.22 [1995])
and administrative proceedings, as well as answers given by
the witness in reply to questions propounded to them in the The policy of the privilege is that of promoting the
course of said proceedings, provided that said allegations or administration of justice and it would be a perversion of the
statements are relevant to the issues, and the answers are privilege to extend it to the client who seeks advice to aid him
responsive to the questions propounded to said witnesses. xxx in carrying out an illegal fraudulent scheme. This would be
The absolute privilege remains regardless of the defamatory tantamount to participating in a conspiracy. (McCormick on
tenor and the presence of malice, if the same are relevant, Evidence, 3rd ed., p. 229 [1984]) (SOURCE: Explanatory Notes, 2019
pertinent or material to the cause in and or subject of the Proposed Amendments to the Revised Rules on Evidence)
inquiry. (Belen v. People, G.R. No. 211120, February 13, 2017)
Claimants through a deceased client
While Philippine law is silent on the question of whether the While the attorney-client privilege survives the death of the
doctrine of absolutely privileged communication extends to client, there is no privilege in a will contest or other case
statements in preliminary investigations or other between parties who both claim through that very client. This
is because his communications may be essential to an
proceedings preparatory to trial. (Id., citing Borg v. Boas, 231
accurate resolution of competing claims of succession, and the
F 2d 788 (1956)
testator would presumably favor disclosure in order to dispose
of his estate accordingly. (Mueller & Kirkpatrick, Modern Evidence,
The amendment in item (b) is that, aside from the lawyer, a
Section 5.24 [1995]) (SOURCE: Explanatory Notes, 2019 Proposed
“person reasonably believed by the client to be licensed to Amendments to the Revised Rules on Evidence)
engage in the practice of law” is included in the prohibition to
testify against a client based on privileged communication Breach of duty by lawyer or client (“self-defense
Also, included in the prohibition are the “other persons exception”)
assisting the attorney” If the lawyer and client become involved in a dispute between
themselves concerning the services provided by the lawyer, the
Item (b) also includes an enumeration of “exceptions” to the privilege does not apply to their dispute. Thus, where a client
“attorney-client” privilege, which is a new provision alleges a breach of duty on the part of the lawyer, i.e.
professional malpractice, incompetence, or ethical violations –
The further amendment in item (b) is gender-based.

CODAL BREAKDOWN AND DISCUSSION | REVISED RULES ON EVIDENCE | JAFRANCISCO 18

or where the lawyer sues a client for his fee, either the lawyer communication made for the purpose or treatment of the
or the client may testify as to communications between them. patient’s physical, mental or emotional condition, including
alcohol or drug addition, particularly the physician,
In theory, the client has impliedly “waived” the privilege by psychotherapist or person believed to be authorized to
making allegations of breach of duty against lawyer. (Mueller & practice medicine
Kirkpatrick, Modern Evidence, Section 5.23 [1995]) (SOURCE:
Explanatory Notes, 2019 Proposed Amendments to the Revised Rules The privilege now covers “members of the patient’s family who
on Evidence) participated in the diagnosis or treatment of the patient under
the direction of the physician or psychotherapist
Lawyer as attesting witness
The privilege does not apply to “a communication relevant to The rationale to include this privilege is that the
an issue concerning an attested document to which the lawyer psychotherapist has a special need to maintain confidentiality.
is an attesting witness.” This should not really be an exception His or her capacity to help his or her patients is completely
because the privilege never arises, as a lawyer who acts as an dependent upon their willingness and ability to talk freely.
attesting witness is not providing professional legal services. Confidentiality is a condition sine qua non for a successful
When an attorney serves as an attesting witness, he is not psychiatric treatment. (Lempert, R. & Saltzburg, S., A Modern
acting as a lawyer and the client’s obvious intent is to have him Approach to Evidence, 2nd ed., pp. 712-713 [1982], citing Report
available to testify to the matter attested. (Mueller & Kirkpatrick, No. 45, Group for the Advancement of Psychiatry 92 [1960]), quoted
Modern Evidence, Section 5.25 [1995]; Lempert, R. & Saltzburg, S., A in the Advisory Committee’s note PFRE 504, the
Modern Approach to Evidence, 3rd ed., pp. 269-370 [1982]) Psychotherapist-Patient Privilege
Joint clients Qualification
The rationale for the exception is that joint clients do not For one to be considered a “psychotherapist,” a
intend their communication to be confidential from each other, medical doctor need only be “licensed” to practice
and typically their communications are made in each other’s medicine and need not be a psychiatrist, whereas a
presence. xxx Agreeing to joint representation means that psychologist must be “licensed” by the government.
each joint client accepts the risk that another joint client may (SOURCE: Explanatory Notes, 2019 Proposed Amendments
later use what he or she has said to the lawyer. (Mueller & to the Revised Rules on Evidence)
Kirkpatrick, Modern Evidence, Section 5.14 [1995]) (SOURCE:
Explanatory Notes, 2019 Proposed Amendments to the Revised Priest – Penitent Privilege
Rules on Evidence)
The old provision limited the privilege to “penitential
communications” made to a minister or priest in the course of
Psychotherapist – Patient Privilege
discipline enjoined by the church to which the priest or minister
Item (c) is completely a different provision on “doctor-patient”
belongs. As worded, it is unduly preferential to the Roman
privilege. This identifies who are covered by the privilege, or
Catholic Church. The amendment expands the privilege to
those who cannot be examined as to any confidential
CODAL BREAKDOWN AND DISCUSSION | REVISED RULES ON EVIDENCE | JAFRANCISCO 19
embrace any confidential communication by a person to a 2. Testimonial Privilege
minister or priest in his professional character as a spiritual
advisor. (SOURCE: Explanatory Notes, 2019 Proposed Amendments Section 25. Parental and filial privilege. —
to the Revised Rules on Evidence)

Public Officer No person shall be compelled to testify against

The use of the phrase “during or after his or her tenure” is a • his or her parents,
matter of style. The Sub-Committee considered the word • other direct ascendants,
“tenure” to be more apt. (SOURCE: Explanatory Notes, 2019 • children or other direct descendants,
Proposed Amendments to the Revised Rules on Evidence) except when such testimony is indispensable
in a crime against that person or by one parent
Other privileged matters: against the other. (25a)
a) editors may not be compelled to disclose the source of
published news;
Note:
b) voters may not be compelled to disclose for whom they
• Use of the phrase “except when such testimony is
voted;
indispensable in a crime against that person or by one
c) trade secrets;
parent against the other” – incorporates Article 315 of the
d) information contained in tax census returns;
Family Code of the Philippines which provides that “[n]o
e) bank deposits (pursuant to the Secrecy of Bank Deposits
descendant can be compelled, in a criminal case, to testify
Act);
against his parents and ascendants.” (SOURCE: Explanatory
f) national security matters and intelligence information; and Notes, 2019 Proposed Amendments to the Revised Rules on
g) criminal matter. (Eagleridge Dev't. Corp. v. Cameron Granville Evidence)
3 Asset Management, Inc., G.R. No. 204700, Nov. 24, 2014)
• A stepmother can be compelled to testify against
stepdaughter, xxx they have no common ancestry,
There is no provision of the Rules disqualifying parties declared
privilege applies only to "direct" ascendants and
in default from taking the witness stand for non-disqualified
descendants. (Lee v. CA, G.R. No. 177861, July 13, 2010)
parties. (Marcos v. Heirs of Navarro, G.R. No. 198240, July 3, 2013)
• The privilege is not strictly a rule on disqualification
because a descendant is not incompetent or disqualified to
testify against an ascendant. xxx refers to a privilege not
to testify, which can be invoked or waived like other
privileges.

CODAL BREAKDOWN AND DISCUSSION | REVISED RULES ON EVIDENCE | JAFRANCISCO 20

Section 26. Privilege relating to trade secrets. – 3. Admissions and Confessions

A person cannot be compelled to testify about any Section 27. Admission of a party. —
trade secret, unless the non-disclosure will conceal fraud
or otherwise work injustice. The act, declaration or omission of a party as to a relevant
fact may be given in evidence against him or her. (26a)
When disclosure is directed, the court shall take such a
protective measure as the interest of the owner of the • Admission
trade secret and of the parties and the furtherance of Any statement of fact made by a party against his interest or
justice may require. (n) unfavorable to the conclusion for which he contends or is
inconsistent with the facts alleged by him.
In Air Philippines Corporation v. Pennswell, Inc. (G.R. No.
172835, December 13, 2007), the Supreme Court held that • To be admissible, it must:
trade secrets are of a privileged nature, but the privilege is not a) involve matters of fact, and not of law;
absolute; the court may compel disclosure where it is b) be categorical and definite;
indispensable for doing justice. A trade secret was defined in c) be knowingly and voluntarily made; and
said case “as a plan or process, tool, mechanism or compound d) be adverse to the admitter's interests, otherwise it would
known only to its owner and those of his employees to whom be self-serving and inadmissible.
it is necessary to confide.” The definition was held to extend to
“a secret formula or process not patented, but known only to Section 28. Offer of compromise not admissible. —
certain individuals using it in compounding some article of
trade having a commercial value.” The Court went on to explain In civil cases, an offer of compromise is not an admission
that a trade secret may “consist of any formula, pattern, device of any liability, and is not admissible in evidence against
or compilation of information that (1) is used in one’s business, the offeror.
and (2) gives the employer an opportunity to obtain an Neither is evidence of conduct nor statements
advantage over competitors who do not possess the
made in compromise negotiations admissible,
information. (SOURCE: Explanatory Notes, 2019 Proposed
Amendments to the Revised Rules on Evidence) 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.

CODAL BREAKDOWN AND DISCUSSION | REVISED RULES ON EVIDENCE | JAFRANCISCO 21

In criminal cases, except those involving quasi-offenses indebtedness. (Tan v. Rodil Enterprises, G.R. No. 168071,
(criminal negligence) or those allowed by law to be December 18, 2006)
compromised, an offer of compromised by the
b. Criminal Cases, EXCEPT quasi- offenses and those
accused may be received in evidence as an implied
allowed to be compromised
admission of guilt. • ADMISSIBLE as an implied admission of guilt.
• INADMISSIBLE if plea of guilt withdrawn; if offer of plea of
A plea of guilty later withdrawn, or an unaccepted offer of guilt to lesser offense is not accepted; if statement made during
a plea of guilty to lesser offense, is not admissible in plea bargain and no plea of guilt results or plea is later
evidence against the accused who made the plea or withdrawn.
offer.
Neither is any statement made in the course of plea Offer made prior to the filing of the criminal complaint cannot
bargaining with the prosecution, which does not xxx be an implied admission of guilt, xxx as it was not made in
result in a plea of guilty or which results in a plea of the context of a criminal proceeding. (San Miguel Corp. v.
Kalalo, G.R. No. 185522, June 13, 2012)
guilty later withdrawn, admissible.
Act of pleading for forgiveness, through letters from detention,
xxx analogous to an attempt to compromise. Offer must be
An offer to pay or the payment of medical, hospital or made under a consciousness of guilt, NOT merely to avoid the
other expenses occasioned by an injury is not admissible inconvenience of imprisonment. (People v. Nazareno, G.R. No.
in evidence as proof of civil or criminal liability for the 180915, Aug. 9, 2010)
injury. (27a)

Offer of Compromise a. Civil Cases Section 29. Admission by third party. —

• NOT ADMISSIBLE as admission of any liability.
• ADMISSIBLE for other purposes (e.g., to prove bias of a The rights of a party cannot be prejudiced by an act,
witness, to negate undue delay, to prove obstruction of criminal declaration, or omission of another, except as hereinafter
investigation/prosecution)
provided. (28)
Rule is NOT absolute:
If a party denies the existence of a debt but offers to pay the
same for the purpose of buying peace and avoiding litigation,
the offer of settlement is inadmissible. If in the course thereof,
the party making the offer admits the existence of an
indebtedness combined with a proposal to settle the claim
amicably, then, the admission is admissible to prove such

CODAL BREAKDOWN AND DISCUSSION | REVISED RULES ON EVIDENCE | JAFRANCISCO 22

Section 30. Admission by co-partner or agent. — Mere association with the principals by direct participation,
without more, does not suffice. Relationship, association and
The act or declaration of a partner or agent authorized by companionship do not prove conspiracy. (Salapuddin v. Court of
Appeals, G.R. No. 184681, February 25, 2013)
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, Section 32. Admission by privies. —
may be given in evidence against such party after the
partnership or agency is shown by evidence other than Where one derives from another, the latter’s act,
such act or declaration. declaration, or omission of the latter, in relation to the
property, is evidence against the former if done while the
The same rule applies to the act or declaration of a joint latter was holding the title. (31a)
owner, joint debtor, or other person jointly interested with
the party. (29a)
Section 33. Admission by silence. —
Section 31. Admission by conspirator. —
An act or declaration made in the presence and within the
The act or declaration of a conspirator relating to the hearing or observation of a party who does or says
conspiracy in furtherance and during its existence, may nothing when the act or declaration is such as naturally to
be given in evidence against the co-conspirator after the call for action or comment if not true, and when proper
conspiracy is shown by evidence other than such act of and possible for him or her to do so, may be given in
declaration. (30a) evidence against him or her. (23a)

The exception provided under Sec. 30, Rule 130 of the Rules The natural instinct of man impels him to resist an unfounded
of Court to the rule allowing the admission of a conspirator claim xxx and defend himself. It is xxx against human nature to
just remain reticent and say nothing in the face of false
requires the prior establishment of the conspiracy by
accusations. (People v. Castañeda, G.R. No. 208290, Dec. 11, 2013)
evidence other than the confession. In this case, there is a
dearth of proof demonstrating the participation of Salapuddin
Silence during custodial investigation is not admission by
in a conspiracy to set off a bomb in the Batasan grounds and
silence as he has the right to remain silent during that stage.
thereby kill Congressman Akbar. Not one of the other persons
(People v. Guillen, G.R. No. 191756, Nov. 25, 2013)
arrested and subjected to custodial investigation professed
that Salapuddin was involved in the plan to set off a bomb in
the Batasan grounds.
CODAL BREAKDOWN AND DISCUSSION | REVISED RULES ON EVIDENCE | JAFRANCISCO 23
Section 34. Confession. — • system,
• scheme,
The declaration of an accused acknowledging his or her • habit,
guilt of the • custom or usage, and the like. (34a)
• offense charged, or
• of any offense necessarily included therein,
may be given in evidence against him or her. (29a) Section 36. Unaccepted offer. —

Extrajudicial confessions are binding only on the confessant An offer in writing to pay a particular sum of money or to
and cannot be admitted against co-accused, except if there is deliver a written instrument or specific personal property
prior establishment of the conspiracy by evidence other than is, if rejected without valid cause, equivalent to the actual
the confession. It must be proven that: production and tender of the money, instrument, or
property. (35)
(a) a)the conspiracy be first proved by evidence other than the
admission itself;
(b) b)the admission relates to the common object; and
(c) c)it has been made while the declarant was engaged in • Previous Conduct as Evidence
carrying out the conspiracy. Evidence that one did a certain thing at one time is not
Mere association with the accused do not conclude that he was admissible to prove that he did the same or similar thing at
a participant in the conspiracy to commit the crime. (Salapuddin another time.
v. CA,G.R. No. 184681, Feb. 25, 2013)
Prior involvement in a cash shortage in the bank's branch does
not conclusively prove that she is responsible for the loss of
money in the new branch. (Metrobank v. Custodio, G.R. No. 17380,
4. Previous Conduct as Evidence March 21, 2011)

Section 35. Similar acts as evidence. — Evidence is not admissible when it shows, or tends to show,
that the accused in a criminal case has committed a crime
Evidence that one did or did not do a certain thing at one independent from the offense for which he is on trial. A man
time is not admissible to prove that he did or did not do may be a notorious criminal, and may have committed many
the same or similar thing at another time; but it may be crimes, and still be innocent of the crime charged on trial.
(People v. Pineda, G.R. No. 141644, May 27, 2004)
received to prove a specific intent or knowledge;
• identity,
• plan,

CODAL BREAKDOWN AND DISCUSSION | REVISED RULES ON EVIDENCE | JAFRANCISCO 24

[Sec. 36 – Testimony generally confined to personal fabrication or improper influence or motive;
knowledge; hearsay excluded is TRANSPOSED to Sec. or
22 – Testimony confined to personal knowledge.]
o (c) one of identification of a person made
5. Hearsay after perceiving him or her. (n)

Section 37. Hearsay. — HEARSAY

• out of court statement made by witness-declarant, not
Hearsay is a statement other than one made by the made during trial or hearing in a case
declarant while testifying at a trial or hearing, offered to • statement = oral or written assertion, or conduct intended
as assertion
prove the truth of the facts asserted therein. A statement
is EXCEPTIONS:
(1) an oral or written assertion or 1) Prior inconsistent statement under oath at a trial, hearing
(2) a non-verbal conduct of a person, if it is intended by or other proceeding, or in a deposition, to impeach
him or her as an assertion. witness-declarant;
2) Prior consistent statement only to rebut “an express or
Hearsay evidence is inadmissible except as otherwise implied charge against the declarant of recent fabrication,
provided in these Rules. or improper influence or motive”;
3) Identification of a person made after perceiving the
A statement is not hearsay person.
• if the declarant testifies at the trial or hearing and
• is subject to cross-examination concerning the
statement, and the statement is
o (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;

o (b) consistent with the declarant's testimony

and is offered to rebut an express or implied
charge against the declarant of recent
CODAL BREAKDOWN AND DISCUSSION | REVISED RULES ON EVIDENCE | JAFRANCISCO 25
 6. Exceptions To The Hearsay Rule death of the deceased person or before the person
became of unsound mind,
Section 38. Dying declaration. — o any statement of the deceased or the
person of unsound mind, may be received in
The declaration of a dying person, made under the evidence
consciousness of an impending death, may be received § if the statement was made upon the
in any case wherein his death is the subject of inquiry, as personal knowledge of the deceased
evidence of the cause and surrounding circumstances of or
such death. (37a) § the person of unsound mind at a time
when the matter had been recently
DEAD MAN’S STATUTE: REQUISITES perceived by him or her and while his
a)the declaration must concern the cause and surrounding or her recollection was clear.
circumstances of the declarant's death; • Such statement, however, is
b)that at the time the declaration was made, the declarant is inadmissible if made under
conscious of his impending death; circumstances indicating its
c)the declarant was competent as a witness; and
lack of trustworthiness. (23a)
d)the declaration is offered in a criminal case for Homicide,
Murder, or Parricide where the declarant is the victim. (People
v. Palanas, G.R. No. 214453, June 17, 2015)
Under the Dead Man's Statute Rule, "[i]f one party to the
alleged transaction is precluded from testifying by death,
insanity, or other mental disabilities, the other party is not
Section 39. Statement of decedent or person of unsound entitled to the undue advantage of giving his own
mind. – uncontradicted and unexplained account of the transaction."
Thus, the alleged admission of the deceased xxx cannot be
In an action against an executor or administrator or other used as evidence against [him] as the latter would be unable to
representative of a deceased person, or against a person contradict or disprove the same. (Garcia v. Vda. de Caparas, G.R.
of unsound mind, upon a claim or demand against the No. 180843, April 17, 2013)
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
testifies on a matter of fact occurring before the

CODAL BREAKDOWN AND DISCUSSION | REVISED RULES ON EVIDENCE | JAFRANCISCO 26

Section 40. Declaration against interest. — • birth,
• adoption, or
The declaration made by a person deceased, or unable to • marriage, or
testify, against the interest of the declarant, if the fact is • in the absence thereof, with whose family he or she
asserted in the declaration was at the time it was made so was so intimately associated as to be likely to have
far contrary to declarant's own interest, that a reasonable accurate information concerning his or her
person in his or her position would not have made the pedigree
declaration unless he or she believed it to be true, may
be received in evidence against himself or herself or his or may be received in evidence where it occurred before
her successors in interest and against third persons. the controversy, and the relationship between the two
persons is shown by evidence other than such act or
A statement tending to expose the declarant to criminal declaration.
liability and offered to exculpate the accused is not
admissible unless corroborating circumstances clearly The word “pedigree” includes
indicate the trustworthiness of the statement. (38a) • relationship,
• family genealogy,
Declaration against interest vs. Admission against interest • birth,
• marriage,
Declaration against interest is made by a person who is neither • death, the dates when and the places where
a party nor in privity with a party to the suit. xxx admissible only
these fast occurred, and the names of the
when the declarant is unavailable as a witness.
relatives.
Admission against interest is made by a party to a litigation or It embraces also facts of family history intimately
by one in privity with or identified in legal interest with such connected with pedigree. (39a)
party, and is admissible whether or not the declarant is
available as a witness. (Lazaro v. Agustin, G.R. No. 152364, April Elements:
15, 2010) a) the actor or declarant is dead or unable to testify;
b) the act or declaration is made by a person related to the
Section 41. Act or declaration about pedigree. — subject by birth, marriage, or adoption, or with whose
family he was so intimately associated;
c) the relationship between the declarant or the actor and the
The act or declaration of a person deceased, or unable to
subject is shown by evidence other than such act or
testify, in respect to the pedigree of another person declaration; and
related to him or her by

CODAL BREAKDOWN AND DISCUSSION | REVISED RULES ON EVIDENCE | JAFRANCISCO 27

d) the act or declaration was made ante litem motam, or prior Family Reputation or Tradition Regarding Pedigree
to the controversy. Requisites:
a) a statement by a member of the family either by
The claim of filiation must be made by the putative father consanguinity, affinity, or adoption;
himself xxx. A notarial agreement to support a child whose b) the statement is about the reputation or tradition of the
filiation is admitted by the putative father was considered family in respect to the pedigree of any member of the
acceptable evidence. Letters to the mother vowing to be a family; and
good father to the child and pictures of the putative father c) the reputation or tradition is one existing previous to the
cuddling the child on various occasions, together with the controversy.
certificate of live birth, proved filiation. However, a student
permanent record, a written consent to a father's operation, or
a marriage contract where the putative father gave consent, Section 43. Common reputation. —
cannot be taken as authentic writing. Standing alone, neither a
certificate of baptism nor family pictures are sufficient to
establish filiation. (Nepomuceno v. Lopez, G.R. No. 181258, March
Common reputation existing previous to the controversy,
19, 2010, reiterating Herrera v. Alba, 460 SCRA 197) as to boundaries of or customs affecting lands in the
community and reputation as to events of
• general history important to the community, or
Section 42. Family reputation or tradition regarding • respecting marriage or
pedigree. — • moral character, may be given in evidence.

The reputation or tradition existing in a family previous to Monuments and inscriptions in public places may be
the controversy, in respect to the pedigree of any one of received as evidence of common reputation. (41a)
its members, may be received in evidence if the witness
testifying thereon be also a member of the family, either The requirement of antiquity (“more than 30 years old”) is
by consanguinity or affinity or adoption. removed. Instead, reliability is ensured because the testimony
represents the consensus of the community.
Entries in family bibles or other family books or charts,
engravings on rings, family portraits and the like, may be
received as evidence of pedigree. (40a)

CODAL BREAKDOWN AND DISCUSSION | REVISED RULES ON EVIDENCE | JAFRANCISCO 28

Section 44. Part of res gestae. — b) the said evidence clearly negatives any premeditation or
purpose to manufacture testimony.
Statements made by a person while a starting occurrence
is taking place or immediately prior or subsequent thereto, Spontaneity, how determined:
a) the time that has lapsed between the occurrence of the act
under the stress of excitement caused by the occurrence
or transaction and the making of the statement;
with respect to the circumstances thereof, may be given b) the place where the statement is made;
in evidence as part of res gestae. c) the condition of the declarant when the utterance is given;
d) the presence or absence of intervening events between the
So, also, statements accompanying an equivocal act occurrence and the statement relative thereto; and
material to the issue, and giving it a legal significance, may e) the nature and the circumstances of the statement itself.
be received as part of the res gestae. (36a) (Manulat v. People, G.R. No. 190892, August 17, 2015)

In People v. Putian (G.R. No. L-33049, November 29, 1976),

the Supreme Court noted that if the declaration was made at Section 45. Records of regularly conducted business
the time of, or immediately thereafter, the commission of the activity. –
crime, or at a time when the exciting influence of the startling
occurrence still continued in the declarant’s mind, it is A
admissible as part of the res gestae. (SOURCE: Explanatory
• memorandum,
Notes, 2019 Proposed Amendments to the Revised Rules on
Evidence) • report,
• record or
Requisites of res gestae: • data compilation of acts, events, conditions,
a) that the principal act, the res gestae be a startling opinions, or diagnoses, made by
occurrence; o writing,
b) the statements were made before the declarant had the o typing,
time to contrive or devise a falsehood; and o electronic,
c) that the statements must concern the occurrence in
o optical or
question and its immediate attending circumstances.
o other similar means at
Tests in applying the res gestae rule: or near the time of or from transmission or supply
a) the act, declaration or exclamation is so intimately of information by a person with knowledge thereof,
interwoven or connected with the principal fact or event and kept in the regular course or conduct of a
that it characterizes as to be regarded as a part of the business activity, and such was the regular
transaction itself; and practice to make the

CODAL BREAKDOWN AND DISCUSSION | REVISED RULES ON EVIDENCE | JAFRANCISCO 29

 • memorandum, • a public officer of the Philippines, or
• report, • by a person in the performance of a duty specially
• record, or enjoined by law,
• data compilation by electronic, optical or are prima facie evidence of the facts therein stated. (44a)
similar means,
all of which are shown by the testimony of the Requisites:
custodian or other qualified witnesses, is excepted a) that the entry was made by a public officer or by another
from the rule on hearsay evidence. (43a) person specially enjoined by law to do so;
b) that it was made by the public officer in the performance of
his duties, or by such other person in the performance of a
duty specially enjoined by law;
Entries in the Course of Business under the old Section 43:
c) that the public officer or other person had sufficient
The party offering must establish that:
knowledge of the facts by him stated, which must have
a) the person who made those entries is dead, outside the
been acquired by him personally or through official
country, or unable to testify;
information.
b) the entries were made at, or near the time of the
transaction to which they refer;
A Traffic Accident Investigation Report cannot be given
c) the entrant was in a position to know the facts stated
probative weight when the investigating officer who prepared
therein;
the same was not presented in court to testify that he had
d) the entries were made in the professional capacity or in the
sufficient knowledge of the facts therein stated, and that he
course of duty of the entrant; and,
acquired them personally or through official information.
e) the entries were made in the ordinary or regular course of
(Standard Insurance Co., Inc. v. Cuaresma, G.R. No. 200055,
business or duty. (Landbank v. Oñate, G.R. No. 192371, September 10, 2014)
January 15, 2014)

Under the new Section 45:

No more requirement that the entrant must be dead or unable
to testify and must have personal knowledge of the recorded
matter. Adopted Rule 8, Section 1 of the REE.

Section 46. Entries in official records. —

Entries in official records made in the performance of his

or her duty by

CODAL BREAKDOWN AND DISCUSSION | REVISED RULES ON EVIDENCE | JAFRANCISCO 30

Section 47. Commercial lists and the like. — is admissible as tending to prove the truth of a matter
stated therein if
Evidence of statements of matters of interest to persons • the court takes judicial notice, or
engaged in an occupation contained in a • a witness expert in the subject testifies,
• list, o that the writer of the statement in the
• register, § treatise,
• periodical, or § periodical or
• other published compilation § pamphlet
is admissible as tending to prove the truth of any • is recognized in his or her
relevant matter so stated if that compilation is published profession or calling as expert
for use by persons engaged in that occupation and is in the subject. (46a)
generally used and relied upon by them therein. (45)

Learned treatises:
Commercial lists and the like: History books and published findings of scientists fall within
Statement of matters contained in a periodical may be this exception provided that an expert on the subject testifies
admitted only "if that compilation is published for use by to the expertise of the writer.
persons engaged in that occupation and is generally used and
relied upon by them.” (MERALCO v. Quisumbing, G.R. No. 127598,
February 22, 2000) Section 49. Testimony or deposition at a former
proceeding. —
Section 48. Learned treatises. —
The testimony or deposition of a
A • witness deceased or
• published • out of the Philippines or who cannot, with due
• treatise, diligence,
• periodical or o be found therein, or
• pamphlet on a subject of o is unavailable or
o history, o otherwise unable to testify,
o law, given in a former case or proceeding, judicial or
o science, or administrative,
o art involving the same parties and subject matter,

CODAL BREAKDOWN AND DISCUSSION | REVISED RULES ON EVIDENCE | JAFRANCISCO 31

 may be given in evidence against the
adverse party who had the opportunity to (b) the statement is offered as evidence of a material fact;
cross-examine him or her. (47a)
(c) the statement is more probative on the point for which
it is offered than any other evidence which the
For the admissibility of a former testimony or deposition that proponent can procure through reasonable efforts;
the adverse party must have had an opportunity to cross- and
examine the witness or the deponent in the prior proceeding.
(d) the general purposes of these rules and the interests
The issues involved in both cases must, at least, be
of justice will be best served by admission of the
substantially the same; otherwise, there is no basis in saying
statement into evidence.
that the former statement was — or would have been —
sufficiently tested by cross-examination or by an opportunity to However, a statement may not be admitted under this
do so. (Republic v. Sandiganbayan, G.R. No. 152375, Dec. 13, 2011) exception unless
• the proponent makes known to the adverse party,
Hearsay evidence is admissible in determining probable sufficiently in advance of the hearing, or
cause in preliminary investigations because such investigation • by the pre-trial stage in the case of a trial of the main
is merely preliminary, and does not finally adjudicate rights and case,
obligations of parties. (PCGG v. Gutierrez, G.R. No. 194159, o to provide the adverse party with a fair
Oct. 21, 2015, reiterating Estrada v. Ombudsman, G.R. No. opportunity to prepare to meet it,
212140-41, January 21, 2015)
§ the proponent's intention to offer the
statement and the particulars of it,
Requisites for applicability:
a) The person making the hearsay statement is credible; • including the name and address
b) There must be “substantial basis” for crediting the hearsay of the declarant. (n)
(NOT to be confused with “substantial evidence”)
Rather than add a number of exceptions to the hearsay rule,
the Sub-Committee opted to adopt the residual or catchall
exception provided in Rules 803 (24) and 804 (b) (5) [now Rule
Section 50. Residual exception. –
807] of the FRE.
A statement not specifically covered by any of the The catchall exception found in the FRE stemmed from the
foregoing exceptions, having equivalent circumstantial ruling in Dallas County v. Commercial Union Assurance Co.,
guarantees of trustworthiness, is admissible if the court Ltd. (286 F. 2d 388 [5th Cir. 1961]), which admitted an old
determines that newspaper article to prove that a fire occurred at the court
CODAL BREAKDOWN AND DISCUSSION | REVISED RULES ON EVIDENCE | JAFRANCISCO 32
tower during construction. Although not falling under any of the (b) A handwriting with which he or she has sufficient
recognized hearsay exceptions, the news article was admitted familiarity; and
because of “circumstantial guarantees of trustworthiness
based on the fact that the individual reporting the fire had no (c) The mental sanity of a person with whom he or she is
motive to falsify and that a false report of a matter so easily
sufficiently acquainted.
checked by readers of the paper would have subjected the
reporter to considerable embarrassment.”
The witness may also testify on his or her impressions of
The catchall exception should be “used very rarely and only in the emotion, behavior, condition or appearance of a
exceptional circumstances.” (Id.) (SOURCE: Explanatory Notes, person. (50a)
2019 Proposed Amendments to the Revised Rules on Evidence)
Admissibility of opinion of an ordinary witness on:
a) the identity of a person about whom he has adequate
7. Opinion Rule knowledge;
b) a handwriting with which he has sufficient familiarity;
c) the mental sanity of a person with whom he is sufficiently
Section 51. General rule. —
acquainted; and
d) may also testify on his impressions of the emotion,
The opinion of witness is not admissible, except as behavior, condition or appearance of a person.
indicated in the following sections. (48)
Admissibility of opinion of an expert witness who:
Section 52. Opinion of expert witness. — The opinion of a) has the required professional knowledge, learning and skill
a witness on a matter requiring special knowledge, skill, of the subject under inquiry sufficient to qualify him to
experience or training or education which he or she shown speak with authority on the subject; and
to posses, may be received in evidence. (49a) b) is familiar with the standard required of a professional under
similar circumstances.
Section 53. Opinion of ordinary witnesses. —
The principle is that the witness' familiarity, and not the
classification by title or specialty, should control issues
The opinion of a witness for which proper basis is given, regarding the expert witness' qualifications. (Casumpang v.
may be received in evidence regarding — Cortejo, G.R. No. 171127, March 11, 2015)
REASONABLE MEASURE OF RELIABILITY: BROAD
(a) the identity of a person about whom he or she has LATITUDE GIVEN TO THE JUDGE
adequate knowledge;

CODAL BREAKDOWN AND DISCUSSION | REVISED RULES ON EVIDENCE | JAFRANCISCO 33

 8. Character Evidence Evidence of the good character of a witness is not
admissible until such character has been
Section 54. Character evidence not generally admissible; impeached.
exceptions: —
In all cases in which evidence of character or a trait
Evidence of a person’s character or a trait of character is of character of a person is admissible, proof may
not admissible for the purpose of proving action in be made by testimony as to reputation or by
conformity therewith in a particular occasion, except: testimony in the form of an opinion. On cross-
examination, inquiry is allowable into relevant
(a) In Criminal Cases: specific instances of conduct.

(1) The character of the offended party may be proved In cases in which character or a trait of character
if it tends to establish in any reasonable degree of a person is an essential element of a charge,
the probability or improbability of the offense claim or defense, proof may also be made of
charged. specific instances of that person's conduct. (51a;
14, Rule 132)
(2) The accused may prove his or her good moral
character, pertinent to the moral trait involved in GENERAL RULE: INADMISSIBLE
the offense charged. However, the prosecution • the “circumstantial use” of character evidence, that a
may not prove his or her bad moral character person acted in a similar way in the past because that is
his or her character or he or she has a propensity for doing
unless on rebuttal.
similar acts
• Prohibited because it is circumstantial at best and it tends
(b) In Civil Cases: to confuse the issues or creates unfair surprise or prejudice

Evidence of the moral character of a party in civil EXCEPTIONS: ADMISSIBLE

case is admissible only when pertinent to the issue
of character involved in the case. Criminal Cases
1) Accused - may prove his or her moral trait pertinent to the
(c) In Criminal and Civil Cases: charge; the prosecution, on rebuttal, may prove the
accused’s bad moral character

CODAL BREAKDOWN AND DISCUSSION | REVISED RULES ON EVIDENCE | JAFRANCISCO 34

2) Offended party – character may be proved if it tends to Burden of evidence is the duty of a party to present
establish probability or improbability of charge. evidence sufficient to establish or rebut a fact in issue to
establish a prima facie case.
Civil Cases Burden of evidence may shift from one party to the
• only when moral character of a party is pertinent to the other in the course of the proceedings, depending
issue of character involved
on the exigencies of the case. (1a)
Character of a Witness
The “burden of proof” remains throughout the trial with the
• good character of a witness may only be proven after such
party upon whom it is imposed. It is the “burden of evidence”
witness’ character has been impeached
that shifts from party to party during trial. (Republic v. Mupas,
G.R. No. 181892, September 8, 2015)
HOW TO PROVE CHARACTER:
1) Testimony on reputation – traditional form
BURDEN OF EVIDENCE
2) Testimony in the form of an opinion – previously not
“burden of going forward,” the burden of proving a fact in issue
allowed, but now recognized that testimony on reputation
is just “opinion”
3) On cross-examination only: the character witness may be
asked about relevant prior specific conduct for the limited Section 2. Conclusive presumptions. —
purpose of testing knowledge and credibility of such
witness The following are instances of conclusive presumptions:

RULE 131 (a) Whenever a party has, by his or her own declaration,
Burden of Proof, Burden of Evidence and act, or omission, intentionally and deliberately led to
Presumptions another to believe a particular thing true, and to act
upon such belief, he or she cannot, in any litigation
Section 1. Burden of proof and burden of evidence. — arising out of such declaration, act or omission, be
permitted to falsify it: and
Burden of proof is the duty of a party to present evidence
on the facts in issue necessary to establish his claim or (b) The tenant is not permitted to deny the title of his or
defense by the amount of evidence required by law. her landlord at the time of commencement of the
Burden of proof never shifts. relation of landlord and tenant between them. (2a)

CODAL BREAKDOWN AND DISCUSSION | REVISED RULES ON EVIDENCE | JAFRANCISCO 35

Given the existence of the lease, the petitioner’s claim denying (d) That a person takes ordinary care of his or her
the respondents’ ownership of the residential house must be concerns;
rejected. According to the petitioner, it is Adoracion who
actually owns the residential building having bought the same, (e) That evidence willfully suppressed would be adverse if
together with the two parcels of land, from her father Tomas,
produced;
who, in turn, bought it in an auction sale.

It is settled that "[o]nce a contact of lease is shown to exist (f) That money paid by one to another was due to the
between the parties, the lessee cannot by any proof, however latter;
strong, overturn the conclusive presumption that the lessor has
a valid title to or a better right of possession to the subject (g) That a thing delivered by one to another belonged to
premises than the lessee." xxx In Santos v. National Statistics the latter;
Office, the Court expounded on the rule on estoppel against a
tenant and further clarified that what a tenant is estopped from (h) That an obligation delivered up to the debtor has been
denying is the title of his landlord at the time of the paid;
commencement of the landlord-tenant relation. If the title
asserted is one that is alleged to have been acquired
(i) That prior rents or installments had been paid when a
subsequent to the commencement of that relation, the
receipt for the later one is produced;
presumption will not apply. (Midway Maritime and Technological
Foundation v. Castro, G.R. No. 189061, August 6, 2014)
(j) That a person found in possession of a thing taken in
Section 3. Disputable presumptions. — the doing of a recent wrongful act is the taker and the
doer of the whole act; otherwise, that things which a
The following presumptions are satisfactory if person possess, or exercises acts of ownership over,
uncontradicted, but may be contradicted and overcome are owned by him or her;
by other evidence:
(a) That a person is innocent of crime or wrong; (k) That a person in possession of an order on himself or
herself for the payment of the money, or the delivery
(b) That an unlawful act was done with an unlawful intent; of anything, has paid the money or delivered the thing
accordingly;
(c) That a person intends the ordinary consequences of
his or her voluntary act; (l) That a person acting in a public office was regularly
appointed or elected to it;

CODAL BREAKDOWN AND DISCUSSION | REVISED RULES ON EVIDENCE | JAFRANCISCO 36

(m) That official duty has been regularly performed; (w) That after an absence of seven years, it being
unknown whether or not the absentee still lives, he or
(n) That a court, or judge acting as such, whether in the she is considered dead for all purposes, except for
Philippines or elsewhere, was acting in the lawful those of succession.
exercise of jurisdiction;
The absentee shall not be considered dead for the
(o) That all the matters within an issue raised in a case purpose of opening his or her succession until after an
were laid before the court and passed upon by it; and absence of ten years.
in like manner that all matters within an issue raised in If he or she disappeared after the age of seventy-
a dispute submitted for arbitration were laid before the five years, an absence of five years shall be
arbitrators and passed upon by them; sufficient in order that his succession may be
opened.
(p) That private transactions have been fair and regular;
The following shall be considered dead for all purposes
(q) That the ordinary course of business has been including the division of the estate among the heirs:
followed;
(1) A person on board a vessel lost during a sea
(r) That there was a sufficient consideration for a voyage, or an aircraft with is missing, who has
contract; not been heard of for four years since the loss
of the vessel or aircraft;
(s) That a negotiable instrument was given or indorsed for
a sufficient consideration; (2) A member of the armed forces who has taken
(t) That an endorsement of negotiable instrument was part in armed hostilities, and has been missing
made before the instrument was overdue and at the for four years;
place where the instrument is dated; (3) A person who has been in danger of death
under other circumstances and whose
(u) That a writing is truly dated; existence has not been known for four years;
and
(v) That a letter duly directed and mailed was received in
the regular course of the mail; (4) If a married person has been absent for four
consecutive years, the spouse present may
contract a subsequent marriage if he or she has

CODAL BREAKDOWN AND DISCUSSION | REVISED RULES ON EVIDENCE | JAFRANCISCO 37

 well-founded belief that the absent spouse is or under void marriage, has been obtained by their
already death. In case of disappearance, where joint efforts, work or industry.
there is a danger of death the circumstances
hereinabove provided, an absence of only two (cc) That in cases of cohabitation by a man and
years shall be sufficient for the purpose of a woman who are not capacitated to marry each
contracting a subsequent marriage. However, other and who have acquire properly through their
in any case, before marrying again, the spouse actual joint contribution of money, property or
present must institute a summary proceedings industry, such contributions and their
as provided in the Family Code and in the rules corresponding shares including joint deposits of
for declaration of presumptive death of the money and evidences of credit are equal.
absentee, without prejudice to the effect of
reappearance of the absent spouse. (dd) That if the marriage is terminated and the
mother contracted another marriage within three
(x) That acquiescence resulted from a belief that the hundred days after such termination of the former
thing acquiesced in was conformable to the law or marriage, these rules shall govern in the absence
fact; of proof to the contrary:

(y) That things have happened according to the (1) A child born before one hundred eighty days
ordinary course of nature and ordinary nature after the solemnization of the subsequent
habits of life; marriage is considered to have been
conceived during such marriage, even
(z) That persons acting as copartners have entered though it be born within the three hundred
into a contract of co-partneship; days after the termination of the former
marriage. and
(aa) That a man and woman deporting (2) A child born after one hundred eighty days
themselves as husband and wife have entered into following the celebration of the subsequent
a lawful contract of marriage; marriage is considered to have been
conceived during such marriage, even
(bb) That property acquired by a man and a though it be born within the three hundred
woman who are capacitated to marry each other days after the termination of the former
and who live exclusively with each other as marriage.
husband and wife without the benefit of marriage

CODAL BREAKDOWN AND DISCUSSION | REVISED RULES ON EVIDENCE | JAFRANCISCO 38

(ee) That a thing once proved to exist continues as long 2. If both were above the age sixty, the younger is
as is usual with things of the nature; deemed to have survived;

(ff) That the law has been obeyed; 3. If one is under fifteen and the other above sixty,
the former is deemed to have survived;
(gg) That a printed or published book, purporting to be
printed or published by public authority, was so 4. If both be over fifteen and under sixty, and the
printed or published; sex be different, the male is deemed to have
survived, if the sex be the same, the older;
(hh) That a printed or published book, purporting
contain reports of cases adjudged in tribunals of the 5. If one be under fifteen or over sixty, and the
country where the book is published, contains correct other between those ages, the latter is deemed
reports of such cases; to have survived.

(ii) That a trustee or other person whose duty it was to (kk) That if there is a doubt, as between two or more
convey real property to a particular person has actually persons who are called to succeed each other, as to
conveyed it to him when such presumption is which of them died first, whoever alleges the death of
necessary to perfect the title of such person or his one prior to the other, shall prove the same; in the
successor in interest; absence of proof, they shall be considered to have
died at the same time. (3a)
(jj) That except for purposes of succession, when two
persons perish in the same calamity, such as wreck, Notes:
battle, or conflagration, and it is not shown who died c) That a person intends the ordinary consequences of his
first, and there are no particular circumstances from or her voluntary act;
which it can be inferred, the survivorship is determined
from the probabilities resulting from the strength and It is presumed that a person intends the ordinary
consequences of his voluntary act and unless the requirements
the age of the sexes, according to the following rules:
for proper substitution were made, a lawyer enjoys the
presumption of authority given him by his client. Racines does
1. If both were under the age of fifteen years, the not deny that the signatures in the pleadings were his. He also
older is deemed to have survived; does not claim that he was prevented by Atty. Manalad from
reading the contents thereof. He only said that since he fully
trusted Atty. Manalad he immediately signed the documents.

CODAL BREAKDOWN AND DISCUSSION | REVISED RULES ON EVIDENCE | JAFRANCISCO 39

From the foregoing, it is clear that Racines acquiesced and w) That after an absence of seven years, it being unknown
gave his stamp of approval to the pleadings filed in court. whether or not the absentee still lives, he or she is
(Racines v. Morallos, A.M. No. MTJ-08- 1698, March 3, 2008) considered dead for all purposes, except for those of
succession.
d) That a person takes ordinary care of his or her concerns;
Case law dictates that the natural presumption is that one does The absentee shall not be considered dead for the purpose of
not sign a document without first informing himself of its opening his or her succession until after an absence of ten
contents and consequences. Further, under Section 3 (p) of the years. If he or she disappeared after the age of seventy-five
same Rule, it is equally presumed that private transactions years, an absence of five years shall be sufficient in order that
have been fair and regular. This behooves every contracting his or her succession may be opened.
party to learn and know the contents of a document before he
signs and delivers it. (Diaz v. People, G.R. No. 208113, December The following shall be considered dead for all purposes
2, 2015) including the division of the estate among the heirs:
1. A person on board a vessel lost during a sea voyage, or an
j) That a person found in possession of a thing taken in the aircraft which is missing, who has not been heard of for
doing of a recent wrongful act is the taker and the doer of four years since the loss of the vessel or aircraft;
the whole act; otherwise, that things which a person 2. A member of the armed forces who has taken part in
possesses, or exercises acts of ownership over, are owned armed hostilities, and has been missing for four years;
by him or her; 3. A person who has been in danger of death under other
circumstances and whose existence has not been known
Celedonio never claimed ownership of the subject items. When for four years; and
the alleged stolen items were found in his motorcycle 4. If a married person has been absent for four consecutive
compartment which he had control over, the disputable years, the spouse present may contract a subsequent
presumption of being the taker of the stolen items arose. He marriage if he or she has a well-founded belief that the
could have overcome the presumption, but he failed to give a absent spouse is already dead. In case of disappearance,
justifiable and logical explanation. Thus, the only plausible where there is danger of death under the circumstances
scenario that could be inferred therefrom was that he took the hereinabove provided, an absence of only two years shall
items. (Celedonio v. People, G.R. No. 209137, July 1, 2015) be sufficient for the purpose of contracting a subsequent
marriage. However, in any case, before marrying again, the
k) That a person in possession of an order on himself or spouse present must institute a summary proceeding as
herself for the payment of the money, or the delivery of provided in the Family Code and in the rules for a
anything, has paid the money or delivered the thing declaration of presumptive death of the absentee, without
accordingly; prejudice to the effect of reappearance of the absent
spouse.

CODAL BREAKDOWN AND DISCUSSION | REVISED RULES ON EVIDENCE | JAFRANCISCO 40

Section 4. No presumption of legitimacy or illegitimacy. If presumptions are inconsistent, the presumption that is
— founded upon weightier considerations of policy shall
apply. If considerations of policy are of equal weight,
There is no presumption of legitimacy of a child born after neither presumption applies. (n)
three hundred days following the dissolution of the
marriage or the separation of the spouses. Whoever Section 6. Presumption against an accused in criminal
alleges the legitimacy or illegitimacy of such child must cases. –
prove his or her allegation. (4a)
If a presumed fact that establishes guilt, is an element of
There is perhaps no presumption of the law more firmly the offense charged, or negates a defense, the existence
established and founded on sounder morality and more of the basic fact must be proved beyond reasonable
convincing reason than the presumption that children born in doubt and the presumed fact follows from the basic fact
wedlock are legitimate. This presumption indeed becomes beyond reasonable doubt. (n)
conclusive in the absence of proof that there is physical
impossibility of access between the spouses during the first
This amendment was taken from Rule 301 of the FRE and
120 days of the 300 days which immediately precedes the birth
clarifies that presumptions should affect only the burden of
of the child due to (a) the physical incapacity of the husband to
evidence or production, referred to as the “bursting bubble”
have sexual intercourse with his wife; (b) the fact that the
approach to presumptions.
husband and wife are living separately in such way that sexual
intercourse is not possible; or (c) serious illness of the husband,
As for the second paragraph, the Supreme Court has held that,
which absolutely prevents sexual intercourse. (SSS v. Aguas,
in case of conflicting presumptions, “it is necessary to examine
G.R. No. 165546, February 27, 2006)
the basis for each presumption, and determine what logical or
social basis exists for each presumption, and then determine
Section 5. Presumptions in civil actions and proceedings. which should be regarded as the more important and entitled
– to prevail over the other.” (People v. Godoy, G.R. Nos. 115908-
09, December 6, 1995) Thus, between the presumption that “a
In all civil actions and proceedings not otherwise young Filipina will not charge a person with rape if it is not true”
provided for by the law or these Rules, a presumption and the presumption of innocence, the latter should prevail
imposes on the party against whom it is directed the because it “is founded upon the first principles of justice, and
burden of going forward with evidence to rebut or meet is not a mere form but a substantial part of the law.” (Id.)
the presumption. (SOURCE: Explanatory Notes, 2019 Proposed Amendments to the
Revised Rules on Evidence)

CODAL BREAKDOWN AND DISCUSSION | REVISED RULES ON EVIDENCE | JAFRANCISCO 41

The model of this amendment is Rule 303 (b) of the URE and is • counsel, or
designed to deal with a situation in a criminal case where the • witnesses with reference to the case,
prosecution relies solely upon a presumption to establish guilt shall be recorded by means of
or the element of a crime and not any other evidence. The Court • shorthand or
may view the presumption in such a case as conclusive or as
• stenotype or
shifting the burden of proof. (SOURCE: Explanatory Notes, 2019
Proposed Amendments to the Revised Rules on Evidence) • by other means of recording found suitable by the
court.

RULE 132 A transcript of the record of the proceedings made by the

Presentation of Evidence • official stenographer,
• stenotypist or recorder
A. EXAMINATION OF WITNESSES and certified as correct by him or her shall be deemed
prima facie a correct statement of such proceedings.
Section 1. Examination to be done in open court. — (2a)

The examination of witnesses presented in a trial or

hearing shall be done in Section 3. Rights and obligations of a witness. —
• open court, and
• under oath or affirmation. A witness must answer questions, although his or her
Unless the witness is answer may tend to establish a claim against him or her.
• incapacitated to speak, or However, it is the right of a witness:
• the questions calls for a different mode of answer,
o the answers of the witness shall be given (1) To be protected from irrelevant, improper, or insulting
orally. (1) questions, and from harsh or insulting demeanor;

Section 2. Proceedings to be recorded. — (2) Not to be detained longer than the interests of justice
require;
The entire proceedings of a trial or hearing, including the
questions propounded to a witness and his or her (3) Not to be examined except only as to matters
answers thereto, the statements made by the pertinent to the issue;
• judge or any of the parties,

CODAL BREAKDOWN AND DISCUSSION | REVISED RULES ON EVIDENCE | JAFRANCISCO 42

(4) Not to give an answer which will tend to subject him or Section 5. Direct examination. —
her to a penalty for an offense unless otherwise
provided by law; or Direct examination is the examination-in-chief of a
witness by the party presenting him on the facts relevant
(5) Not to give an answer which will tend to degrade his to the issue. (5a)
or her reputation, unless it to be the very fact at issue
or to a fact from which the fact in issue would be Section 6. Cross-examination; its purpose and extent. —
presumed. But a witness must answer to the fact of
his or her previous final conviction for an offense. (3a, Upon the termination of the direct examination, the
19a) witness may be cross-examined by the adverse party
• on any relevant matter,
• as to many matters stated in the direct
A witness need not worry that the oral examination might examination, or connected therewith,
subject him or her to badgering by adverse counsel. The trial o with sufficient fullness and freedom to test
court’s duty is to protect every witness against oppressive § his or her accuracy and truthfulness
behavior of an examiner and this is especially true where the
and
witness is of advanced age. (Lee v. Court of Appeals, G.R. No.
177861, July 13, 2010)
§ freedom from interest or bias, or
§ the reverse,
• and to elicit all important facts
Section 4. Order in the examination of an individual bearing upon the issue. (6a)
witness. —
DELETED “as to any matters stated in the direct examination,
The order in which the individual witness may be
or connected therewith”
examined is as follows;
(a) Direct examination by the proponent; REPLACED WITH “on any relevant matter”
(b) Cross-examination by the opponent; Shift from the American Rule, the Scope-of-Direct Rule, which
(c) Re-direct examination by the proponent; limits cross-examination to matters taken up in the direct
(d) Re-cross-examination by the opponent. (4) examination or anything connected therewith, to the English
Rule, or the Wide Open Rule, which permits cross on any
relevant matter.

CODAL BREAKDOWN AND DISCUSSION | REVISED RULES ON EVIDENCE | JAFRANCISCO 43

 A question which suggests to the witness the answer
Section 7. Re-direct examination; its purpose and extent. which the examining party desires is a leading question. It
— is not allowed, except:
(b) On cross examination;
After the cross-examination of the witness has been
concluded, he or she may be re-examined by the party (c) On preliminary matters;
calling him or her, to explain or supplement his or her
answers given during the cross-examination. (d) When there is a difficulty is getting direct and
intelligible answers from a witness who is ignorant, or
On re-direct-examination, questions on matters not a child of tender years, or is of feeble mind, or a deaf-
dealt with during the cross-examination, may be allowed mute;
by the court in its discretion. (7a)
(e) Of an unwilling or hostile witness; or
Section 8. Re-cross-examination. —
(f) Of a witness who is an adverse party or an officer,
Upon the conclusion of the re-direct examination, the director, or managing agent of a public or private
adverse party may re-cross-examine the witness on corporation or of a partnership or association which is
• matters stated in his or her re-direct examination, an adverse party.
and also
• on such other matters as may be allowed by the A misleading question is one which assumes as true a fact
court in its discretion. (8a) not yet testified to by the witness, or contrary to that which
he or she has previously stated. It is not allowed. (10a)
Section 9. Recalling witness. —
A child of tender years may be asked leading questions under
After the examination of a witness by both sides has been Section 10(c), Rule 132 of the Rules of Court. Section 20 of the
2000 Rule on Examination of a Child Witness also provides that
concluded, the witness cannot be recalled without leave
the court may allow leading questions in all stages of
of the court. The court will grant or withhold leave in its examination of a child if the same will further the interests of
discretion, as the interests of justice may require. (9) justice. This rule was formulated to allow children to give
reliable and complete evidence, minimize trauma to children,
Section 10. Leading and misleading questions. — encourage them to testify in legal proceedings and facilitate the
ascertainment of truth. (People v. Ilogon, G.R. No. 206294, June
29, 2016)

CODAL BREAKDOWN AND DISCUSSION | REVISED RULES ON EVIDENCE | JAFRANCISCO 44

Section 11. Impeachment of adverse party's witness. — Section 12. Impeachment by evidence of conviction of
crime. –
A witness may be impeached by the party against whom
he or she was called, by contradictory evidence, by For the purpose of impeaching a witness, evidence that
• evidence that his or her general reputation for truth, he or she has been convicted by final judgment of a crime
• honestly, or integrity is bad, or shall be admitted if
• by evidence that he or she has made at other times (a) the crime was punishable by a penalty in excess of
statements inconsistent with his or her present, one year; or
testimony, (b) the crime involved moral turpitude, regardless of the
o but not by evidence of particular wrongful penalty.
acts, except that it may be shown by the
examination of the witness, or the record of However, evidence of a conviction is not admissible if the
the judgment, that he or she has been conviction has been the subject of an amnesty or
convicted of an offense. (11a) annulment of the conviction. (n)

Under a rule permitting the impeachment of an adverse

witness, although the calling party does not vouch for the • Instead of adopting the qualification under Rule 609 (a) (1)
witness’ veracity, he is nonetheless bound by his testimony if it of the FRE allowing impeachment “if the crime was
is not contradicted or remains unrebutted. punishable by death or imprisonment in excess of one
A party who calls his adversary as a witness is, therefore, not year,” the Sub-Committee deleted “death” because of the
bound by the latter’s testimony only in the sense that he may abolition of death penalty in our jurisdiction.
contradict him by introducing other evidence to prove a state
of facts contrary to what the witness testifies on. A rule that • Instead of adopting the provision in Rule 609 (a) (2) of the
provides that the party calling an adverse witness shall not be FRE, allowing impeachment if the crime “involved
bound by his testimony does not mean that such testimony dishonesty or false statement, regardless of the
may not be given its proper weight, but merely that the calling punishment,” the Sub-Committee opted to substitute the
party shall not be precluded from rebutting his testimony or qualification “(b) [if] the crime involved moral turpitude,
from impeaching him. (Gaw v. Chua, G.R. No. 160855, April 16, regardless of the penalty” considering that “moral
2008) turpitude” has a settled meaning in our law and conviction
of such a crime has an unquestionable bearing on honesty,
veracity and integrity. (SOURCE: Explanatory Notes, 2019
Proposed Amendments to the Revised Rules on Evidence)

CODAL BREAKDOWN AND DISCUSSION | REVISED RULES ON EVIDENCE | JAFRANCISCO 45

Section 13. Party may not impeach his or her own Before a witness can be impeached by evidence that he
witness. — or she has made at other times statements inconsistent
with his or her present testimony,
Except with respect to witnesses referred to in • the statements must be related to him or her, with
paragraphs (d) and (e) of Section 10 of this Rule, the party the circumstances of the times and places and the
presenting the witness is not allowed to impeach his or persons present, and
her credibility. • he or she must be asked whether he or she made
such statements, and if so, allowed to explain
A witness may be considered as unwilling or hostile only them.
if
• so declared by the court upon adequate showing If the statements be in writing they must be shown to the
of his or her adverse interest, witness before any question is put to him or her
• unjustified reluctance to testify, or concerning them. (13a)
• his or her having misled the party into calling him
or her to the witness stand. [Sec. 14. Evidence of good character of witness –
INCORPORATED in Sec. 54, Rule 130]
The unwilling or hostile witness so declared, or the
witness who is an adverse party, may be impeached by Section 15. Exclusion and separation of witnesses. —
the party presenting him or her in all respects as if he or
she had been called by the adverse party, except by The court,
evidence of his or her bad character. • motu proprio or
• upon motion,
He or she may also be impeached and cross- shall order witnesses excluded so that they cannot
examined by the adverse party, but such cross- hear the testimony of other witnesses.
examination must only be on the subject matter of
his or her examination-in-chief. (12a) This rule does not authorize exclusion of

Section 14. How witness impeached by evidence of (a) a party who is a natural person,
inconsistent statements. —
(b) a duly designated representative of a juridical entity
which is a party to the case,

CODAL BREAKDOWN AND DISCUSSION | REVISED RULES ON EVIDENCE | JAFRANCISCO 46

 (c) a person whose presence is essential to the when made; but such evidence must be received
presentation of the party's cause, or with caution. (16a)

(d) a person authorized by a statute to be present.

Section 17. When part of transaction, writing or record
The court may also cause witnesses to be kept separate given in evidence, the remainder, the remainder
and to be prevented from conversing with one another, admissible. —
directly or through intermediaries, until all shall have been
examined. (15a) When part of an
• act,
Section 16. When witness may refer to memorandum. — • declaration,
• conversation,
A witness may be allowed to refresh his or her memory • writing or record is given in evidence by one party,
respecting a fact, by • the whole of the same subject may be inquired into
• anything written or recorded by by the other,
o himself or herself or
o under his or her direction at the time when AND when a detached
the fact occurred, or • act,
o immediately thereafter, or • declaration,
o at any other time when the fact was fresh in • conversation,
his or her memory • writing or record is given in evidence,
• and knew that the same was correctly written or any other act, declaration, conversation, writing or record
recorded; but in such case the writing or record necessary to its understanding may also be given in
must be produced and may be inspected by the evidence. (17)
adverse party, who may, if he or she chooses,
cross examine the witness upon it, and may read it Section 18. Right to respect writing shown to witness. —
in evidence.
• So, also, a witness may testify from such writing or Whenever a writing is shown to a witness, it may be
record, though he retain no recollection of the inspected by the adverse party. (18)
particular facts, if he or she is able to swear that the
writing or record correctly stated the transaction B. AUTHENTICATION AND PROOF OF DOCUMENTS

CODAL BREAKDOWN AND DISCUSSION | REVISED RULES ON EVIDENCE | JAFRANCISCO 47

Section 19. Classes of Documents. — (a) By anyone who saw the document executed or
written;
For the purpose of their presentation evidence,
documents are either public or private. (b) By evidence of the genuineness of the signature or
handwriting of the maker; or
Public documents are: (c)
(d) By other evidence showing its due execution and
(a) The written official acts, or records of the official acts authenticity.
of the sovereign authority, official bodies and
tribunals, and public officers, whether of the Any other private document need only be identified as that
Philippines, or of a foreign country; which it is claimed to be. (20)

(b) Documents acknowledge before a notary public Public documents

except last wills and testaments; Admissible without proof of due execution and genuineness.

(c) Documents that are considered public documents a) The written official acts, or records of the official acts of the
sovereign authority, official bodies and tribunals, and public
under treaties and conventions which are in force
officers, whether of the Philippines, or of a foreign country;
between the Philippines and the country of source;
b) Documents acknowledged before a notary public, except
and last wills and testaments; and
(d) Public records, kept in the Philippines, of c) Public records, kept in the Philippines, of private
private documents required by law to the documents required by law to be entered therein.
entered therein. d) Public documents under treaties and conventions.

All other writings are private. (20a) Private documents

Due execution and authenticity must be proved:
Section 20. Proof of private document. —
a) By anyone who saw the document executed or written;
b) By evidence of the genuineness of the signature or
Before any private document offered as authentic is
handwriting of the maker;
received in evidence, its due execution and authenticity c) By other evidence showing its due execution and
must be proved by any of the following means: authenticity.

CODAL BREAKDOWN AND DISCUSSION | REVISED RULES ON EVIDENCE | JAFRANCISCO 48

Section 21. When evidence of authenticity of private genuine to the satisfaction of the
document not necessary. — judge. (22)

Where a private document is more than thirty years old, Section 23. Public documents as evidence. —
is
• produced from the custody in which it would Documents consisting of entries in public records made
naturally be found if genuine, and in the performance of a duty by a public officer are prima
• is unblemished by any alterations or circumstances facie evidence of the facts therein stated.
of suspicion,
no other evidence of its authenticity need be given. All other public documents are evidence, even against a
(21) third person, of the fact which gave rise to their execution
and of the date of the latter. (24a)
Section 22. How genuineness of handwriting proved. — Section 24. Proof of official record. —

The handwriting of a person may be proved by The record of public documents referred to in paragraph
(a) of Section 19, when admissible for any purpose, may
• any witness who believes it to be the handwriting be
of such person because he or she has seen the • evidenced by an official publication thereof or
person write, or • by a copy attested by
o the officer having the legal custody of the
• has seen writing purporting to be his or her upon record, or
which the witness has acted or been charged, and o by his or her deputy, and accompanied,
has thus acquired knowledge of the handwriting of if the record is not kept in the Philippines, with a certificate
such person. that such officer has the custody.

Evidence respecting the handwriting may also be given by If the office in which the record is kept is in a foreign
a comparison, country, which is a contracting party to a treaty or
made by the witness or the court, convention to which the Philippines is also a party, or
with writings admitted or treated as genuine considered a public document under such treaty or
by the party against whom the convention pursuant to paragraph (c) of Section 19
evidence is offered, or proved to be hereof,

CODAL BREAKDOWN AND DISCUSSION | REVISED RULES ON EVIDENCE | JAFRANCISCO 49

 the certificate or its equivalent shall be in the Whenever a copy of a document or record is attested for
form prescribed by such treaty or convention the purpose of evidence, the attestation must state, in
subject to reciprocity granted to public substance, that the
documents originating from the Philippines. • copy is a correct copy of the original, or
• a specific part thereof, as the case may be.
For documents originating from a foreign country which is The attestation must be under the official seal of the
not a contracting party to a treaty or convention referred attesting officer, if there be any, or if he or she be the clerk
to in the next preceding sentence, the certificate may be of a court having a seal, under the seal of such court. (26a)
made by a
• secretary of the embassy or legation, For a copy of a foreign public document to be admissible, the
• consul general, following requisites are mandatory:
• consul, (1) it must be attested by the officer having legal custody of the
records or by his deputy; and
• vice-consul, or
(2) it must be accompanied by a certificate by a secretary of
• consular agent or the embassy or legation, consul general, consul, vice-
• by any officer in the foreign service of the consular or consular agent or foreign service officer, and
Philippines stationed in the foreign country in with the seal of his office.
which the record is kept, and authenticated by the
seal of his or her office. Such official publication or copy must be accompanied, if the
record is not kept in the Philippines, with a certificate that the
A document that is accompanied by a certificate or its attesting officer has the legal custody thereof. The certificate
equivalent may be presented in evidence without further may be issued by any of the authorized Philippine embassy or
proof, the certificate or its equivalent being prima facie consular officials stationed in the foreign country in which the
record is kept, and authenticated by the seal of his office. The
evidence of the due execution and genuineness of the
attestation must state, in substance, that the copy is a correct
document involved. copy of the original, or a specific part thereof, as the case may
The certificate shall not be required when a treaty be, and must be under the official seal of the attesting officer.
or convention between a foreign country and the (Nedlloyd Lijnen B.V. Rotterdam v. Glow Laks Enterprises, Ltd., G.R.
Philippines has abolished the requirement, or has No. 156330, November 19, 2014)
exempted the document itself from this formality.
(24a) Section 26. Irremovability of public record. —

Section 25. What attestation of copy must state. — Any public record, an official copy of which is admissible
in evidence, must not be removed from the office in which
CODAL BREAKDOWN AND DISCUSSION | REVISED RULES ON EVIDENCE | JAFRANCISCO 50
it is kept, except upon order of a court where the the office of the civil registrar which had allegedly issued said
inspection of the record is essential to the just license, the Supreme Court held that the certification issued by
determination of a pending case. (26) the civil registrar enjoyed probative value, as his duty was to
maintain records of data relative to the issuance of a marriage
license. (Abbas v. Abbas, G.R. No. 183896, January 30, 2013, citing
Section 27. Public record of a private document. — Republic v. Court of Appeals, G.R. No. 103047, September 2, 1994)

An authorized public record of a private document may be Section 29. How judicial record impeached. —
proved by
• the original record, or Any judicial record may be impeached by evidence of:
• by a copy thereof,
o attested by the legal custodian of the (a) want of jurisdiction in the court or judicial officer,
record, with an appropriate certificate that
such officer has the custody. (27) (b) collusion between the parties, or
Section 28. Proof of lack of record. — (c) fraud in the party offering the record, in respect to the
proceedings. (29)
A written statement signed by
• an officer having the custody of an official record Section 30. Proof of notarial documents. —
or
• by his or her deputy Every instrument duly acknowledged or proved and
that after diligent search no record or entry of a certified as provided by law, may be presented in
specified tenor is found to exist in the records of his or evidence without further proof, the certificate of
her office, acknowledgment being prima facie evidence of the
accompanied by a certificate as above provided, is execution of the instrument or document involved. (31a)
admissible as evidence that the records of his or
her office contain no such record or entry. (28a) Section 31. Alteration in document, how to explain. —
In an action for declaration of nullity of marriage, where the wife
The party producing a document as genuine which
failed to present the actual marriage license, or a copy thereof,
and relied on the marriage contract as well as the testimonies • has been altered and
of her witnesses to prove the existence of said license, and the • appears to have been altered after its execution,
husband, to prove that no such license was issued, turned to

CODAL BREAKDOWN AND DISCUSSION | REVISED RULES ON EVIDENCE | JAFRANCISCO 51

 in a part material to the question in dispute, must To avoid interruption of proceedings, parties or their
account for the alteration. attorneys are directed to have such translation prepared
before trial. (33)
He or she may show that the alteration
• was made by another, without his concurrence, C. OFFER AND OBJECTION
or
• was made with the consent of the parties Section 34. Offer of evidence. —
affected by it, or
• was otherwise properly or innocent made, or The court shall consider no evidence which has not been
• that the alteration did not change the meaning formally offered. The purpose for which the evidence is
or language of the instrument. offered must be specified. (34)
If he or she fails to do that, the document shall not
be admissible in evidence. (31) Section 35. When to make offer. —

All evidence must be offered orally.

The offer of the testimony of a witness in evidence must

Section 32. Seal. — be made at the time the witness is called to testify.

There shall be no difference between sealed and The offer of documentary and object evidence shall be
unsealed private documents insofar as their made after the presentation of a party's testimonial
admissibility as evidence is concerned. (32) evidence. (35a)

Section 33. Documentary evidence in an unofficial Thus, the trial court is bound to consider only the testimonial
language. — evidence presented and exclude the documents not offered.
Documents which may have been identified and marked as
exhibits during pre-trial or trial but which were not formally
Documents written in an unofficial language shall not be
offered in evidence cannot in any manner be treated as
admitted as evidence, unless accompanied with a evidence. Neither can such unrecognized proof be assigned
translation into English or Filipino. any evidentiary weight and value. It must be stressed that there
is a significant distinction between identification of
documentary evidence and its formal offer. The former is done
in the course of the pre-trial, and trial is accompanied by the
CODAL BREAKDOWN AND DISCUSSION | REVISED RULES ON EVIDENCE | JAFRANCISCO 52
marking of the evidence as an exhibit; while the latter is done waived when accused did not object to the testimony when it
only when the party rests its case. The mere fact that a was not first offered upon calling the complainant. (SOURCE:
particular document is identified and marked as an exhibit does Explanatory Notes, 2019 Proposed Amendments to the Revised Rules
not mean that it has already been offered as part of the on Evidence)
evidence.

The rule on formal offer of evidence is not a trivial matter. Section 37. When repetition of objection unnecessary. —
Failure to make a formal offer within a considerable period of
time shall be deemed a waiver to submit it. Consequently, any When it becomes reasonably apparent in the course of
evidence that has not been offered shall be excluded and
the examination of a witness that the question being
rejected. (Heirs of Pasag v. Spouses Parocha, G.R. No. 155483, April
27, 2007)
propounded are of the same class as those to which
objection has been made, whether such objection was
Section 36. Objection. — sustained or overruled, it shall not be necessary to
repeat the objection, it being sufficient for the adverse
Objection to offer of evidence offered orally must be made party to record his continuing objection to such class of
immediately after the offer is made. questions. (37a)

Objection to the testimony of a witness for lack of a formal Section 38. Ruling. —
offer must be made as soon as the witness begins to
testify. Objection to a question propounded in the course The ruling of the court must be given immediately after the
of the oral examination of a witness must be made as objection is made, unless the court desires to take a
soon as the grounds therefor become reasonably reasonable time to inform itself on the question presented;
apparent. but the ruling shall always be made during the trial and at
such time as will give the party against whom it is made
The grounds for the objections must be specified. (36a) an opportunity to meet the situation presented by the
ruling.
This amendment incorporates the ruling in Catuira v. Court of
Appeals (G.R. No. 105813, September 12, 1994), a case where The reason for sustaining or overruling an objection need
the prosecution failed to offer in evidence the testimony of a not be stated. However, if the objection is based on two
complaining witness upon calling her to testify and that the or more grounds, a ruling sustaining the objection on one
offer was made only after her testimony and after the accused or some of them must specify the ground or grounds
had moved that the testimony be stricken off the record. The relied upon. (38)
Supreme Court held that the procedural error or defect was
CODAL BREAKDOWN AND DISCUSSION | REVISED RULES ON EVIDENCE | JAFRANCISCO 53
 RULE 133
Section 39. Striking out answer. — Weight and Sufficiency of Evidence

Should a witness answer the question before the adverse Section 1. Preponderance of evidence, how determined.
party had the opportunity to voice fully its objection to the —
same, or where a question is not objectionable, but the
answer is not responsive, or where a witness testifies In civil cases, the party having burden of proof must
without a question being posed or testifies beyond limits establish his or her case by a preponderance of evidence.
set by the court, or when the witness does a narration
instead of answering the question, and such objection is In determining where the preponderance or superior
found to be meritorious, the court shall sustain the weight of evidence on the issues involved lies, the court
objection and order such answer, testimony or narration may consider
to be stricken off the record. • all the facts and circumstances of the case,
• the witnesses' manner of testifying,
On proper motion, the court may also order the striking • their intelligence,
out of answers which are incompetent, irrelevant, or • their means and opportunity of knowing the facts
otherwise improper. (39a) to which there are testifying,
• the nature of the facts to which they testify,
Section 40. Tender of excluded evidence. — • the probability or improbability of their testimony,
• their interest or want of interest, and also
If documents or things offered in evidence are excluded • their personal credibility
by the court, the offeror may have the same attached to o so far as the same may legitimately appear
or made part of the record. If the evidence excluded is upon the trial.
oral, the offeror may state for the record the name and
other personal circumstances of the witness and the The court may also consider the number of witnesses,
substance of the proposed testimony. (n) though the preponderance is not necessarily with the
greater number. (1a)

Preponderance of evidence:
• burden of proof in civil cases
• is the weight, credit, and value of the aggregate evidence
on either side

CODAL BREAKDOWN AND DISCUSSION | REVISED RULES ON EVIDENCE | JAFRANCISCO 54

• synonymous with the term "greater weight of evidence" or
"greater weight of credible evidence Section 3. Extrajudicial confession, not sufficient ground
for conviction. —
It is presumed that a person is innocent of wrong; that a person
takes ordinary care of his concerns; that private transactions
An extrajudicial confession made by an accused, shall
have been fair and regular; and that the ordinary course of
business has been followed. Based on these presumptions, [it not be sufficient ground for conviction, unless
is presumed] that xxx NAIA III [was] built in accordance with the corroborated by evidence of corpus delicti. (3)
specifications required The burden of proof lies with the
Government to prove by preponderance of evidence that the Section 4. Circumstantial evidence, when sufficient. —
NAIA III suffered from structural defects. (Republic v. Mupas, G.R. Circumstantial evidence is sufficient for conviction if:
NO. 181892, September 8, 2015)
(a) There is more than one circumstances;
Section 2. Proof beyond reasonable doubt. —
(b) The facts from which the inferences are derived are
In a criminal case, the accused is entitled to an acquittal, proven; and
unless his or her guilt is shown beyond reasonable doubt.
(c) The combination of all the circumstances is such as to
Proof beyond reasonable doubt does not mean such a produce a conviction beyond reasonable doubt.
degree of proof, excluding possibility of error, produces
absolute certainly. Inferences cannot be based on other inferences. (4a)
Moral certainly only is required, or that degree of
proof which produces conviction in an The amendment incorporates the ruling of the Supreme Court
unprejudiced mind. (2a) in People v. Austria (G.R. No. 55109, April 8, 1991) where it was
held that the “conviction of appellant Eduardo Austria on an
Proof beyond reasonable doubt: inference based on another inference cannot be maintained. It
• burden of proof in criminal cases. is axiomatic that conviction should be made on the basis of a
• does not mean such a degree of proof, excluding strong, clear and compelling evidence.” (SOURCE: Explanatory
possibility of error, produces absolute certainty Notes, 2019 Proposed Amendments to the Revised Rules on
Evidence)
• moral certainty only is required, or that degree of proof
which produces conviction in an unprejudiced mind.
To sustain a conviction based on circumstantial evidence, the
• still the standard for criminal prosecutions under the
following requisites must concur:
Intellectual Property Code. (ABS-CBN Corp. v. Gozon, G.R.
a) there must be more than one circumstance to convict;
No. 195956, March 11, 2015)

CODAL BREAKDOWN AND DISCUSSION | REVISED RULES ON EVIDENCE | JAFRANCISCO 55

b) the facts on which the inference of guilt is based must be (b) Whether it is the product of reliable principles and
proved; and methods;
c) the combination of all the circumstances is such as to
produce a conviction beyond reasonable doubt. (c) Whether the witness has applied the principles and
methods reliably to the facts of the case; and
With respect to the third requisite, it is essential that the
circumstantial evidence presented must constitute an
unbroken chain, which leads one to a fair and reasonable (d) Such other factors as the court may deem helpful to
conclusion pointing to the accused, to the exclusion of others, make such determination.
as the guilty person. (Franco v. People, G.R. No. 191185, February
1, 2016, citing People v. Ayola, G.R. No. 138923, September 4, 2001) This new provision gives guidance to judges in determining
weight to be given to expert opinion. It hews to the basic sense
Although there was no eyewitness or direct evidence xxx expressed by the US Supreme Court in Daubert v. Merrel
(which) point to the petitioner as the one who killed his wife, Pharmaceuticals, Inc. that the judge must have considerable
there was also no direct evidence establishing that the victim leeway in the matter and that the listing of particular factors
took her own life, circumstantial evidence may be established was meant to be “helpful” rather than “definitive.” (SOURCE:
or admitted. It is the quality of the circumstances, rather than Explanatory Notes, 2019 Proposed Amendments to the Revised Rules
the quantity, xxx, (which must) consist of an unbroken chain on Evidence)
that will inescapably lead to the conclusion that the accused is
guilty without an iota of doubt. (Manulat, Jr. v. People, G.R. No. Section 6. Substantial evidence. —
190892, Aug. 17, 2015)
In cases filed before administrative or quasi-judicial
bodies, a fact may be deemed established if
Section 5. Weight to be given opinion of expert witness, • it is supported by substantial evidence, or
how determined. – • that amount of relevant evidence which a
reasonable mind might accept as adequate to
In any case where the opinion of an expert witness is justify a conclusion. (5)
received in evidence, the court has a wide latitude of
discretion in determining the weight to be given to such
opinion, and for that purpose may consider the following: Substantial Evidence:
• burden of proof in administrative or quasi-judicial bodies.
(a) Whether the opinion is based upon sufficient facts or • means "that amount of relevant evidence which a
data; reasonable mind might accept as adequate to justify a
conclusion.”

CODAL BREAKDOWN AND DISCUSSION | REVISED RULES ON EVIDENCE | JAFRANCISCO 56

• affidavits may be sufficient to establish substantial
evidence (Punongbayan & Araullo v. Lepon, G.R. No. 174115,
November 9, 2015)

Section 6. Power of the court to stop further evidence. —

The court may stop the introduction of further testimony

upon any particular point when the evidence upon it is
already so full that more witnesses to the same point
cannot be reasonably expected to be additionally
persuasive. But this power shall be exercised with
caution. (6a)

Section 7. Evidence on motion. —

When a motion is based on facts not appearing of record

the court may hear the matter on affidavits or depositions
presented by the respective parties, but the court may
direct that the matter be heard wholly or partly on oral
testimony or depositions. (7)

CODAL BREAKDOWN AND DISCUSSION | REVISED RULES ON EVIDENCE | JAFRANCISCO 57