EVIDENCE is the means, sanctioned by these rules, of ascertaining in a

judicial proceeding the truth respecting a matter of fact. (Sec. 1)

SCOPE - The rules of evidence shall be the same in all courts and in all trials
and hearings, except as otherwise provided by law or these rules. (Sec. 2)
Evidence vs. Proof

Evidence - mode and manner of proving competent facts in judicial

proceedings

Proof - result or effect of evidence; when the requisite quantum of

evidence of a particular fact has been duly admitted and given weight

Factum probandum vs. Factum Probans

Factum probandum ultimate fact or fact sought to be established;

proposition

Factum probans evidentiary fact or the fact by which the factum

probandum is to be established; materials which establishes the
proposition

Law on evidence procedural law

Shall not diminish, increase or modify substantive rights (Sec 5 (5), Art
VIII, Consti)
New rules may be held applicable to cases pending at the time of the
change in rules as parties have no vested right in the rules of evidence

Except in criminal cases when the new rule would permit reception
of lesser quantum of evidence to convict (ex: unconstitutional, ex
post facto)

Specifically applicable only in judicial proceedings

Quasi-judicial: suppletory character whenever practicable and

convenient, except when the governing law specifically adopts ROC

Classification of evidence based on the Rules of Court:

1. Object that which is directly addressed to the senses of the court and
consists of tangible things exhibited or demonstrated in open court, in
an ocular inspection or at a place designated by the court for its view
or observation of an exhibition, experiment or demonstration

Autoptic proference presenting in open court the evidentiary

articles for the observation or inspection of the tribunal

2. Documentary evidence evidence supplied by written instruments or

derived from conventional symbols, such as letters, by which ideas are
represented on material substances

3. Testimonial submitted to the court through the testimony or

deposition of a witness
Other classifications
1. Relevant, Material, and Competent Evidence
a. Relevant evidence having any value in reason as tending to prove
any matter provable in an action

Test of relevancy logical relation of the evidentiary fact to the

fact in issue, whether it tends to prove the probability or
improbability of the fact in issue

b. Material evidence directed to prove a fact in issue as determined

by the rules of substantive law and pleadings

Materiality of evidence is determined by WON the fact it tends to

prove is in issue

c. Competent one that is not excluded by the Rules, law or the

Constitution
2. Direct and Circumstantial Evidence
a. Direct that which proves the fact in dispute without the aid of any
inference or presumption
b. Circumstantial proof of the fact or facts from which, taken either
singly or collectively, the existence of a particular fact in dispute
may be inferred as a necessary or probable consequence
3. Cumulative and Corroborative Evidence
a. Cumulative evidence of the same kind and to the same state of
facts
b. Corroborative additional evidence of a different character to the
same point
4. Prima facie and Conclusive Evidence
a. Prima facie that which, standing alone, unexplained or
uncontradicted, is sufficient to maintain the proposition affirmed
b. Conclusive that class of evidence which the law does not allow to
be contradicted
5. Primary and Secondary Evidence
a. Primary or best evidence, that which the law regards as affording
the greatest certainty of the fact in question

b. Secondary evidence substitutionary evidence, that which is

inferior to the primary evidence and is permitted by law only when
the best evidence is not available
6. Positive and Negative Evidence
a. Positive when a witness affirms that a fact did or did not occur. It
is entitled to greater weight since witness represents of his personal
knowledge.
b. Negative witness states that he did not see or know of the
occurrence of a fact; a total disclaimer of personal knowledge
ADMISSIBILITY OF EVIDENCE - Evidence is admissible when it is relevant
to the issue and is not excluded by the law or these rules. (Sec. 3)
RELEVANCY; COLLATERAL MATTERS - Evidence must have such a relation
to the fact in issue as to induce belief in its existence or non-existence.
Evidence on collateral matters shall not be allowed, except when it tends in
any reasonable degree to establish the probability of the facts in issue. (Sec.
4)
Two requisites for admissibility:
1. Relevance determinable by rules of logic and human experience.
None but facts having rational probative value are admissible
(Wigmore)
2. Competence determined by prevailing exclusionary rules of evidence;
all facts having rational probative value are admissible unless some
specific rule forbids their admission. Therefore, admissibility is an affair
of logic and law.

Objection to the admissibility made at the time such evidence is

offered or as soon as the objection to the admissibility shall have become
apparent. Otherwise, waived.

Multiple admissibility where evidence is relevant and competent for

two or more purposes, such evidence should be admitted for any and all
the purposes for which it is offered provided it satisfies all the
requirements of law for its admissibility

Conditional admissibility where the evidence at the time it is offered

appears to be immaterial or irrelevant unless it is connected with the
other facts to be subsequently proved, such evidence may be received on
condition that the other facts will be proved thereafter, otherwise the
evidence will be stricken out
Qualification: no bad faith on the part of the proponent

Necessary to avoid unfair surprises to the other party

Curative admissibility treats upon the right of a party to introduce

incompetent evidence in his behalf where the court has admitted the
same kind of evidence of the adverse party

EXTRA NOTES
Theories:
1. American rule admission of such incompetent evidence, without
objection by the opponent does not justify such opponent in
rebutting it by similar incompetent evidence
2. English rule if a party has presented inadmissible evidence. The
adverse party may resort to similar incompetent evidence
3. Massachusetts rule adverse party may be permitted to introduce
similar incompetent evidence in order to avoid a plain and unfair
prejudice caused by the admission of the other partys
To determine application:
1. WON incompetent evidence was reasonably objected to, and
2. WON, regardless of the objection vel non, the admission will cause a
plain and unfair prejudice to the party against whom it is admitted

Conversely, where admissible evidence has been improperly

excluded, the other party should not be permitted to introduce
similar evidence (Martin)

Former rule: illegally obtained evidence still admissible unless specifically

forbidden
Abandoned in Stonehill vs. Diokno -> documentary evidence, illegally
obtained, is inadmissible on a timely motion or action to suppress

Collateral matters matters other than the facts in issue and which are
offered as a basis for inference as to the existence or non-existence of the
facts in issue
Irrelevant collateral matters inadmissible
Circumstantial evidence evidence of relevant collateral facts

Weight to evidence, once admitted, depends on judicial evaluation (Rule

133 and jurisprudence)

Admissibility determined at the time it is offered to the court

 Object evidence offered when presented for the courts view or

evaluation
Testimonial offered by the calling of the witness to the stand
Documentary formally offered by the proponent immediately before
he rests his case
Burden of Proof and Presumptions (Rule 131)
BURDEN OF PROOF - the duty of a party to present evidence on the facts in
issue necessary to establish his claim or defense by the amount of evidence
required by law (Sec. 1). It is the onus probandi; obligation imposed upon a
party who alleges the existence of facts necessary for the prosecution of his
action or defense to establish the same by the requisite quantum of evidence
Burden of Proof

Burden of
Evidence

Civil cases - on the

party who would
be defeated if no
evidence
were
given on either
side

Both
civil
and
criminal cases
lies with party who
asserts
an
affirmative
allegation

Criminal cases
always
on
the
prosecution
Does not shift as it
remains
throughout the trial
with
the
party
upon whom it is
imposed

Shifts from party to

party
depending
upon
the
exigencies of the
case in the course
of the trial

Generally
determined by the
pleading filed by
the party

Generally
determined by the
developments
at
the trial or by
provisions of law

A. FACTS WHICH ARE PRESUMED

Presumption inference of an existence or non-existence of a fact which

courts are permitted to draw from the proof of other facts

 Compared to judicial notice and judicial admission

Presumption: proponent still has to introduce evidence of the basis

of the presumption, evidence of the existence or non-existence of
facts from which the court can draw the inference of the fact in
issue. In cases of judicial notice and judicial admission, as a rule,
proponent does not have to introduce evidence.

Presumptions of Law

Presumptions of Fact

Praesumptiones juris

Praesumptiones hominis

Certain inference must be made

whenever the facts appear which
furnish the basis for the inference

Discretion is vested in the tribunal as

to drawing the inference

Reduced to fixed rules and form a

part
of
the
system
of
jurisprudence

Derived wholly and directly from the

circumstances of the particular case by
means of the common experience of
mankind

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

DISPUTABLE PRESUMPTIONS
The following presumptions are satisfactory if uncontradicted, but
may be contradicted and overcome by other evidence:
a. That a person is innocent of crime or wrong;
b. That an unlawful act was done with unlawful intent;
c. That a person intends the ordinary consequences of his voluntary act;
d. That a person takes ordinary care of his concerns;

e. That evidence willfully suppressed would be adverse if produced;

f.

That the money paid by one to another was due to the latter;

g. That the thing delivered by one to another belonged to the latter;

h. That an obligation delivered up to the debtor has been paid;
i.

That prior rents or installments had been paid when a receipt for the latter
ones is produced;

j.

That a person in possession of a thing taken in the doing of a recent

wrongful act is the taker and the doer of the whole act; otherwise, that
things which a person possesses, or exercises acts of ownership over, are
owned by him;

k. That a person in possession of an order on himself for the payment of

money, or the delivery anything, has paid the money or delivered the
thing accordingly;
l.

That a person acting in a public office was regularly appointed or elected

to it;

m. That official duty has been regularly performed;

n. That a court, or judge acting as such, whether in the Philippines or
elsewhere, was acting in the lawful exercise of jurisdiction;
o. That all the matters within an issue raised in a case were laid before the
court and passed upon by it; and in like manner that all matters within an
issue raised a dispute submitted for arbitration were laid before the
arbitrators and passed upon by them;
p. That private transactions have been fair and regular;
q. That the ordinary course of business have been followed;
r.

That there was sufficient consideration for a contract;

s. That a negotiable instrument was given or indorsed for a sufficient

consideration;
t. That an indorsement of a negotiable instrument was made before the
instrument was overdue and at the place where it was dated;
u. That a writing is duly dated;
v. That a letter duly directed and mailed was received in the regular course
of the mail;
w. That after an absence of 7 years, it being unknown whether or not the
absentee still lives, he shall be considered dead for all purposes except
those of succession.
The absentee shall not be considered dead for the purpose of opening his
succession till after an absence of 10 years. If he disappeared after the
age of 75, an absence of 5 years shall be sufficient in order that his
succession may be opened.
The following shall be presumed dead for all purposes, including the
division of the estate among the heirs:
1) A person on board a vessel lost during a sea voyage, or an aircraft
which is missing, who has not been heard of for 4 years since the lost
of the vessel or aircraft;

2) A member of the armed forces who has taken part in armed hostilities
and has been missing for 4 years;
3) A person who has been in danger of death under other circumstances
and whose existence has not been known for 4 years;
4) If a married person has been absent for 4 consecutive years, the
spouse present may contract a subsequent marriage if he or she has a
well-founded belief that the absent spouse is already dead. In case of
disappearance, where there is danger of death under the
circumstances hereinabove provided, an absence of only 2 years shall
be sufficient for the purpose of contracting a subsequent marriage.
However, in any case, before marrying again, the spouse present must
institute a summary proceeding as provided in the Family Code and in
the rules for declaration of presumptive death of the absentee, without
prejudice to the effect of the reappearance of the absent spouse.
x. That acquiescence resulted from a belief that the thing acquiesced in was
conformable to the law or fact;
y. That things have happened according to the ordinary course of nature and
the ordinary habits of life;
z. That persons acting as co-partners have entered into a contract of
partnership;
aa.That a man and woman deporting themselves as husband and wife have
entered into a lawful contract of marriage;
ab.That property acquired by a man and a woman who are capacitated to
marry each other and who live exclusively with each other as husband and
wife without the benefit of marriage or under a void marriage, has been
obtained by their joint efforts, work, or industry;
ac. That in cases of cohabitation by a man and a woman who are not
capacitated to marry each other and who have acquired property through
their actual joint contribution of money, property, or industry, such
contributions and their corresponding shares including joint deposits of
money and evidences of credit are equal;
ad.That if the marriage is terminated and the mother contracted another
marriage within 300 days after such termination of the former marriage,
these rules shall govern in the absence of proof to the contrary:
1) A child born before 180 days after the solemnization of the subsequent
marriage is considered to have been conceived during the former
marriage, provided it be born within 300 days after the termination of
the former marriage.
2) A child born after 180 days following the celebration of the subsequent
marriage is considered to have been conceived during such marriage,
even though it be born within 300 days after the termination of the
former marriage.
ae.That a thing once proved to exist continues as long as is usual with the
things of that nature;
af. That the law has been obeyed;

ag.That a printed or published book, purporting to be printed or published by

public authority, was so printed or published;
ah.That a printed or published book, purporting to contain reports of cases
adjudged in tribunals of the country where the book is published, contains
correct reports of such cases;
ai. That a trustee or other person whose duty it was to convey the real
property to a particular person has actually conveyed it to him when such
presumption is necessary to perfect the title of such person or his
successor-in-interest;
aj. That except for purposes of succession, when 2 persons perish in the
same calamity, such as wreck, battle, or conflagration, and it is not shown
who died first, and there are no particular circumstances from which it can
be inferred, the survivorship is determined from the probabilities resulting
from the strength and age of the sexes, according to the following rules:
1) If both were under the age of 15, the older is deemed to have survived;
2) If both were above the age of 60, the younger is deemed to have
survived;
3) If one is under 15 and the other is above 60, the former is deemed to
have survived;
4) If both be over 15 and under 60, and the sex is different, the male is
deemed to have survived; if the sex is the same, the older;
5) If one be under 15 or over 60, and the other between those ages, the
latter is deemed to have survived
ak. That if there is doubt, as between 2 or more persons who are called to
succeed each other, as to which of them died first, whoever alleges the
death of one prior to the other, shall prove the same; in the absence of
proof, they shall be considered to have died at the same time.
EXTRA NOTES

Par (a)

Legislature may provide for prima facie evidence of guilt provided

there be a rational connection between the facts proved and the
ultimate fact presumed

Requisites for par. (e)

1. The evidence is material

2. Party had the opportunity to produce the same
3. Said evidence is available only to said party

Presumption does not apply if evidence is equally available to both

parties, or is merely corroborative/cumulative or unnecessary
People vs. Realon (1980)

Presumption does not arise from the failure of the prosecution to

present the NBI agents and the results of the fingerprint and paraffin tests in
view of the overwhelming evidence on the positive identification of the
accused. Furthermore, the defense could have availed of said evidence which
was equally available to it
People vs. Navaja (1993)
The adverse presumption of suppression of evidence does not arise
when:
1. The suppression is not willful,
2. The evidence withheld is merely corroborative or cumulative,
3. The evidence is at the disposal of both parties,
4. The suppression is an exercise of a privilege

Par. (i) is connected with the Civil Code principles

Civil Code, Article 1176
The receipt of the principal by the creditor, without reservation
with respect to the interest, shall give rise to the presumption
that said interest has been paid.
The receipt of a later installment of a debt without reservation as
to prior installments, shall likewise raise the presumption that
such installments have been paid.

Par (j) similar rationale:

People vs. Sendaydiego (1978)

If a person had in his possession a falsified document and he made use

of it, taken advantage of it and profited thereby, the presumption is that he is
the material author of the falsification.

Par (v) it must be proved that the letter was properly addressed with
postage pre-paid and that it was actually mailed
If not returned to sender, it is presumed that it was received by the
addressee
Barrameda vs. Castillo (1977)

Under Rule 13, Sec 10, service by pleadings by mail is complete upon
the expiration of 10 days after mailing, unless the court otherwise provides,
while service by registered mail is complete upon actual receipt by the
addressee, but if he fails to claim his mail from the post office within 5 days
from the date of first notice, the service is complete at the expiration of such

time. There must, however, be conclusive proof that a first notice was sent to
the addressee as the presumption that official duty has been regularly
performed does not apply to this situation
Ferraren vs. Santos (1982)
If, however, the postmaster certifies that first notice was sent, the
presumption that official duty has been regularly performed arises and
overrides the contrary claim of the addressee.

Par (w) taken from Civil Code

Sub par 1&2 the absentee is presumed to have died at the end of the
period (5/7/10 years)
Sub par 3 (qualified absence) absentee is presumed to have died at
the time he was exposed to the danger or peril

At the start of the 4 year period

Number (4) does not actually provide for a presumption corollary

procedural rule
Victory Shipping Lines vs. WCC (106 Phil 1165)

Where the fate of the vessel is known, and not where the vessel was
merely lost or missing, the disputable presumption of death does not arise
and the fact of death, must, instead, be established by preponderance of
evidence

Par (dd) taken from Art 259 of the Civil Code, in line with Art 168 of the
Family Code

JUDICIAL NOTICE AND JUDICIAL ADMISSIONS

JUDICIAL NOTICE, WHEN MANDATORY - A court shall take judicial notice,
without the introduction of evidence, of the existence and territorial extent of
states, their political history, forms of government and symbols of nationality,
the law of nations, the admiralty and maritime courts of the world and their
seals, the political constitution and history of the Philippines, the official acts
of legislative, executive and judicial departments of the Philippines, the laws
of nature, the measure of time, and the geographical divisions. (Sec. 1)
JUDICIAL NOTICE, WHEN DISCRETIONARY - A court may take judicial
notice of matters which are of public knowledge, or are capable to
unquestionable demonstration, or ought to be known to judges because of
their judicial functions. (Sec. 2)

JUDICIAL NOTICE, WHEN HEARING NECESSARY - During the trial, the

court, on its own initiative, or on request of a party, may announce its
intention to take judicial notice of any matter and allow the parties to be
heard thereon. After the trial, and before judgment or on appeal, the proper
court, on its own initiative or on request of a party, may take judicial notice of
any matter and allow the parties to be heard thereon if such matter is
decisive of a material issue in the case. (Sec. 3)

Judicial notice cognizance of certain facts which judges may properly

take and act on without proof because they already know them. It is based
on considerations of expediency and convenience and may be taken by
court on its own motion or when it is requested by either parties.

JUDICIAL ADMISSIONS - An admission, verbal or written, made by a party

in the course of the proceedings in the same case, does not require proof. The
admission may be contradicted only by showing that it was made through
palpable mistake or that no such admission was made. (Sec. 4)
Judicial admissions may be made in
1. Pleadings filed by the parties
2. The course of the trial, either by verbal or written manifestations or
stipulations
3. Other stages of the judicial proceeding

Must be made in the same case in which it is offered

If made in another case or in another court must be proved as in any
other fact, but entitled greater weight

Admissible unless:
1. Made only for purposes of the first case
2. Withdrawn with the permission of the court
3. Court deems it proper to relieve the party

Admissions in a pleading which have been withdrawn or superseded by an

amended pleading
Considered as extrajudicial admissions
However, the rule seems now to include superseded pleadings as
judicial admissions
Lim vs. Jabalde (1989)

Facts subject of a stipulation or agreement entered into by the parties

at the pre-trial of a case constitute judicial admission by them which, under

this section, do not require proof and cannot be contradicted unless

previously shown to have been made through palpable mistake.
PCIB vs. Escolin (1974)
When the parties in a case agree on what the foreign law provides,
these are admissions of fact which the other parties and the court are made
to rely and act upon; hence they are in estoppel to subsequently take a
contrary position.
JUDICIAL NOTICE OF FOREIGN
MUNICIPAL ORDINANCE

LAWS,

LAW

OF

NATIONS

AND

GR: Courts are required to take judicial notice of laws

XP: Ordinances:

MTC required to take judicial notice of ordinances of the

municipality or city wherein they sit

RTC must take judicial notice only:

1. When required to do so by statute
2. In a case of appeal before them wherein the inferior court took
judicial notice of an ordinance involved in said case
Or when capable of unquestionable demonstration (also
applies with administrative regulations)

Courts are required to take judicial notice of the decisions of appellate

courts but not of the decisions of coordinate courts, not even the decision
or the facts involved in another case tried by the same court itself (unless
the parties introduce the same in evidence or doing so is convenient)

Foreign laws A question of fact. May not be taken judicial notice and
have to be proved, except when said laws are within the actual knowledge
of the court. To prove written foreign law, one must follow the
requirements in Sec 24-25, Rule 132
Processual presumption - no proof nor admission, foreign law presumed
to be the same as that in the Philippines

To prove unwritten foreign law Sec 46, Rule 130

OBJECT AS EVIDENCE - Objects as evidence are those addressed to the

senses of the court. When an object is relevant to the fact in issue, it may be
exhibited to, examined or viewed by the court. (Sec. 1)

Object evidence includes any article or object which may be known or

perceived by the use of any of the senses sight (visual), hearing
(auditory), touch (tactile), taste (gustatory), or smell (olfactory)
Includes:
1. Examination of the anatomy of a person or of any substance taken
therefrom
2. Conduct of tests, demonstrations, or experiments
3. Examination of representative portrayals of the object in question

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

by:
1. Actually viewing the object becomes object evidence
2. Receiving testimonial evidence thereon

The fact that an ocular inspection has been held does not preclude a party
from introducing other evidence on the same issue
Ocular inspection lies within the discretion of the court

Invalid if conducted by a judge without notice or presence of the

parties

Court may refuse introduction of object evidence and rely on testimonial

evidence alone if:
1. Exhibition of such object is contrary to public policy, morals or decency

But if view is necessary in the interest of justice, may still be

exhibited but the court may exclude the public from such view

Viewing may not be refused if the indecent or immoral object

constitute the very basis for the criminal or civil action

2. To require its being viewed in court or in an ocular inspection would

result in delays, inconvenience, and expenses out of proportion to the
evidentiary value of such object
3. Such object evidence would be confusing or misleading
4. Testimonial or documentary evidence already presented clearly
portrays the object in question as to render a view unnecessary

Documents are considered object evidence if the purpose is to:

1. Prove their existence or condition or the nature of the handwritings
thereon
2. Determine the age of the paper used or the blemishes or alterations
thereon

DOCUMENTARY EVIDENCE - Documents as evidence consists of writings or

any material containing letters, words, numbers, figures, symbols or other
modes of written expressions offered as proof of their contents. (Sec. 2)

BEST EVIDENCE RULE: THE ORINIGAL OF THE DOCUMENT MUST BE PRODUCED;

EXCEPTIONS. (SEC. 3)
GR: When the subject of inquiry is the contents of a document, no evidence
shall be admissible other than the original document itself.

XPs:
a. When the original has been lost or destroyed, or cannot be produced in
court, without bad faith on the part of the offeror;
b. When the original is in the custody or under the control of the party
against whom the evidence is offered, and the latter fails to produce it
after reasonable notice;
c. When the original consists of numerous accounts or other documents
which cannot be examined in court without great loss of time and the fact
sought to be established from them is only the general result of the whole;
and
d. When the original is public record in the custody of a public officer or is
recorded in a public office
ORIGINAL OF DOCUMENT
a. The original of a document is one the contents of which are the subject of
inquiry.
b. When a document is in two or more copies executed at or about the same
time, with identical contents, all such copies are equally regarded as
originals.
c. When an entry is repeated in the regular course of business, one being
copied from another at or near the time of the transaction, all the entries
are likewise equally regarded as originals. (Sec. 4)
EXTRA NOTES

Document deed, instrument or other duly authorized paper by which

something is proved, evidenced, or set forth

Best Evidence Rule rule of exclusion

 Secondary evidence cannot inceptively be introduced as the original

writing itself must be produced in court
Non-production of the original document, unless justified under Sec 3,
gives rise to the presumption of suppression of evidence
Applies only when the content of such document is the subject of
inquiry
In criminal cases where the issue is not only with respect to the
contents of the document but also as to whether such document
actually existed with the participation therein as imputed to the
accused, the original itself must be presented.

Libel published in a newspaper: copy of said newspaper

Falsification of a document: original of the document

Does not apply if transactions have been recorded in writing but the
contents of such writing are not the subject of inquiry

Affidavits and depositions strictly speaking, BER does not apply,

but will not be admitted if affiants or deponents are available as
witnesses
Mahilum vs. CA (1966)

A signed carbon copy or duplicate of a document executed at the same

time as the originals is known as a duplicate original and may be introduced
in evidence without accounting for the non-production of the original.
People vs. Tan (105 Phil 1242)
With respect to documents prepared in several copies through the use
of carbon sheets, SC has held that each carbon copy is considered an original
provided that the writing of a contract upon the outside sheet, including the
signature of the party sought to be charged thereby, produces a facsimile
upon the sheets beneath, such signature being thus reproduced by the same
stroke of the pen which made the surface or exposed impression

However, even if said signature on each copy was written through

separate acts, all of carbon copies are regarded as originals if each copy
was intended as a repository of the same legal act of the party thereto

Imperfect carbon copies merely secondary evidence

Telegrams and cables depends on the issue to be proved

Original dispatch issue is the contents of the telegram as received by
the addressee
Message delivered for transition issue as to the telegram sent by the
sender
Both issue is the inaccuracy of the transmission

Provincial Fiscal of Pampanga vs. Reyes (55 Phil 905)

On the issue as to the contents of the articles sent by the accused for
publication, the manuscript was the best evidence; but on the issue as to
what was actually published, a copy of the newspaper publication was the
best evidence.
SECONDARY EVIDENCE - When the original document has been lost or
destroyed, or cannot be produced in court, the offeror, upon proof of its
execution or existence and the cause of its unavailability without bad faith on
his part, may prove its contents by a copy, or by a recital of its contents in
some authentic document, or by the testimony of witnesses in the order
stated. (Sec. 5)

Requisites: proof by satisfactory evidence of

1. Due execution of the original

Proved through the testimony of either:

a. Person/s who executed it;
b. Person before whom its execution was acknowledged; or
c. Any person who was present and saw it executed and delivered
or who thereafter saw it and recognized the signatures, or one to
whom the parties thereto had previously confessed the
execution thereof

2. Loss, destruction or unavailability of all such originals, not due to bad

faith

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

had acted in good faith does not preclude his introduction of
secondary evidence of the contents thereof

May be proved by any person who:

a. Knew of fact of loss or destruction
b. Had made a sufficient examination of the places where the
document or papers of similar character are usually kept by the
person in whose custody the document was and has been
unable to find it
c. Has made any other investigation which is sufficient to satisfy
the court that the document is indeed lost

3. Reasonable diligence and good faith in the search or attempt to

produce the original
All duplicates or counterparts must be accounted for before using
copies thereof
De Vera vs. Aguilar (1993)

Since all the duplicates or multiplicates are parts of the writing to be

proved, no excuse for non-production of the document can be regarded as
established until it appears that all of its parts are unavailable
PNB vs. Olila (98 Phil 1002)
When the original is outside the jurisdiction of the court, as when it is
in a foreign country, secondary evidence is admissible

Secondary evidence may consist of:

1. Copy of said document
2. Recital of its contents in an authentic document
3. Recollection of witnesses
In this particular order

Except when specifically required by law

E.g. lost notarial will testimony of at least 2 credible witnesses

Reconstitution governed by Act 3110 + jurisprudence

If the document is in the custody or under the control of the adverse party,
he must have reasonable notice to produce it. If after such notice and after
satisfactory proof of its existence, he fails to produce the document,
secondary evidence may be presented as in the case of its loss. (Sec. 6)
When the original of a document is in the custody of a public officer or is
recorded in a public office, its contents may be proved by a certified copy
issued by the public officer in custody thereof. (Sec. 7)
A party who calls for the production of a document and inspects the same is
not obliged to offer it as evidence. (Sec. 8)
No particular form of notice is required
As long as it fairly appraises the other party as to what papers are
desired

Even oral demand in court is allowed

Made on a reasonable time

Notice must be given to the adverse party or his counsel even if papers is
in the hands of a third person
Phil. Ready-Mix Concrete Co. vs. Villacorta, et al (98 Phil 993)

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

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

Remember: the duplicate copy, if complete is itself an original copy

Only issue: receipt of the original

Justified refusal of the adverse party to produce the document

presumption of suppression of evidence
Only authorizes the introduction of secondary evidence

Where such document is produced admissibility

Requisites for admissibility must be present

Production of evidence under Rule 130 Production of evidence under

Rule 27
Warner, Barnes & Co., Ltd. vs. Buenaflor (36 OG 3290)

Where the nature of the action is in itself a notice, as where it is for the
recovery or annulment of documents wrongfully obtained or withheld by the
other party, no notice to produce said documents is required

Third exception to BER justified not only by the fact that the records are
voluminous but also because the fatum probandum is just the general
result of the whole
For exception to apply
1. The voluminous character of the records must be established
2. Such records must be made available to the adverse party so that
their correctness may be tested on cross-examination
Originals have to be produced if:

Detailed contents of the records are challenged for being hearsay 1

Issues are raised as to the authenticity or correctness of the

detailed entries