Welcome to Scribd, the world's digital library. Read, publish, and share books and documents. See more
Standard view
Full view
of .
Look up keyword
Like this
0 of .
Results for:
No results containing your search query
P. 1
UP Evidence Primer

UP Evidence Primer

Ratings: (0)|Views: 1,180|Likes:
Published by Sui

More info:

Categories:Types, Business/Law
Published by: Sui on Jul 23, 2011
Copyright:Attribution Non-commercial


Read on Scribd mobile: iPhone, iPad and Android.
download as DOC, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
See more
See less





It is the means, sanctioned by the Rules of Court, of ascertaining in a judicial proceeding the truth respecting a matter of fact.(Sec. 1, Rule 128, Rulesof Court)
Applicability -
 The rules of evidence, being part of the Rules of Court, apply onlyto judicial proceedings. (Sec. 1, Rule 128, Rules of Court)It is a well settled procedural principle that the Rules of Court shall notapply to
election cases
land registration
insolvency proceedings, and other cases
, except by analogy or in suppletorycharacter and whenever practical and convenient. (Sec. 4, Rule 1, Rules of Court)Also the rules on evidence does not apply to
quasi- judicial
court martial cases.
the Rules on Electronic Evidence
apply to all civil actions andproceedings as well as quasi-judicial and administrative cases. (Sec. 2, Rule 1,Rules on Electronic Evidence)
Scope -
 The rules of evidence shall be the
same in all courts
and in all trialsand hearings, except as otherwise provided by law or the Rules of Court.
:1. Rules on Summary Procedure in civil actions;2. In the Rules of Summary Procedure in criminal cases, where the witnessessubmit their affidavits and counter-affidavits, subject only to cross-examination;3. In agrarian cases; and4. Rules regarding the testimony of witnesses from examinations, etc., in casesunder the MTC (where the parties merely submit their position papers and theirwitnesses’ affidavits and counter-affidavits. The rules of evidence are applicable to both civil and criminal cases becausethe law does not distinguish.
When the law specifically provides the procedure in receivingevidence. (Sec. 2, Rule 128, Rules of Court) The
purpose of evidence
is to ascertain the truth; however the truth isnot really the actual truth for the findings of the court would depend on theevidence presented and such is called the legal truth.Evidence is only required when the court needs to resolve a
question of fact
. So the case must present an
issue of fact
Justicis Nemini Neganda Est
2 Kinds of Facts:
Ultimate fact (factum probandum) -
principal, determinate andconstitutive facts upon the existence of which the plaintiff’s cause of actionrests.
does not refer to the details of probative matter or particulars of evidence bywhich these material elements are to be established
proposition to be established, necessarily hypothetical
Evidentiary facts (factum probans)
– facts which are necessary for thedetermination of the ultimate facts
Premises upon which conclusions of ultimate facts are based.
Brought forward as a reality to convince the tribunal that the factumprobandum is also realFactum probandumFactum probans"ultimate facts""intermediate facts"Proposition to be establishedMaterial evidencing thepropositionHypothetical Existent
Distinction between proof and evidence:
1. Proof is not the evidence itself. There is proof only because of evidence. It ismerely the probative effect of evidence and is the conviction or persuasion of themind resulting from a consideration of the evidence.2. Evidence is the medium or means by which a fact is proved or disproved. Proof is the effect of evidence. It must be remembered that bare allegationsunsubstantiated by evidence, are not equivalent to proof.
Requisites for the admissibility of evidence:
Under Sec. 3 of Rule 128, “Evidence is admissible when it is relevant to theissue and is not excluded by the law or these rules.1.the evidence is relevant2.the evidence is not excluded by the rules (competent)
Axiom of Relevancy
-None but facts having rational probative value areadmissible; and2.
Axiom of Competency
- All facts having rational probative value areadmissible unless some specific rule forbids their admission.
To be admissible, the evidence must be both relevant and competent
Justicis Nemini Neganda Est
Relevant Evidence
Under Sec. 4 of Rule 128, evidence to be relevant must have a relation tothe fact in issue as to induce belief in its existence or non-existence. It deals withthe rational relationship between the evidence and the fact to be proved. This fact may either be the immediate fact in issue or the ultimate fact inissue.
Example: a car accident.
immediate fact
is to prove that the defendant is driving way beyondthe speed limit. The
ultimate fact
in a car accident is whether or not the damage causedto the plaintiff arose out of the defendant’s negligent operation of his car. There is no precise and universal test of relevancy provided by law,however the determination of whether particular evidence is relevant restslargely at the discretion of the court, which must be exercised according to theteachings of logic and everyday experience.
Competent Evidence
If the test of relevancy is logic and common sense, the test of competenceis the law or the rules. The question to be asked is whether the evidence is allowed by the law orby the rules, for if allowed, such is competent and if not, it is incompetent.Competency when applied to a witness refers to his eligibility to take thestand and to testify. For purposes of trial objections, it is sloppy to object to atestimony or a document as incompetent for the term is appropriately directed towa witness.As for electronic evidence, it is competent and admissible if it complies andis authenticated in the manner prescribed. (Sec. 3, Rule 3, Rules of ElectronicEvidence)
Corroborative evidence -
It is additional evidence of a different kind and charactertending to prove the same point.
Cumulative evidence
- It is additional evidence of the same kind and charactertending to prove the same proposition.
Irrelevant evidence
- offered piece of evidence has no probative value
Inadmissible evidence
- offered evidence is excluded by some rule of evidence
Incompetent evidence
- offered evidence is not qualified under the rules of testimonial evidence
Justicis Nemini Neganda Est

Activity (25)

You've already reviewed this. Edit your review.
1 hundred reads
1 thousand reads
Kayzer Saba liked this
Carrie Aragones liked this
Alyanna Apacible liked this
hevah liked this
mapitag2012 liked this
Athena Louise liked this
mapitag2012 liked this

You're Reading a Free Preview

/*********** DO NOT ALTER ANYTHING BELOW THIS LINE ! ************/ var s_code=s.t();if(s_code)document.write(s_code)//-->