You are on page 1of 6

EVIDENCE (MIDTERM REVIEWER)

1. Define Evidence
Ans:
Evidence is the means, sanctioned by these rules, of ascertaining in a
judicial proceeding the truth respecting a matter of fact. (Sec. 1, Rule 128)
Evidence is a mode and manner of proving competent facts and
circumstances on which a party relies to establish the fact in dispute judicial
proceedings. It is fundamentally a
procedural law.
2. Distinguish ultimate facts from evidentiary facts
Ans:
Ultimate facts (Factum probandum) are important and substantial facts
which either directly form the basis of the primary right and duty, or which directly
make up the wrongful
acts or omissions of the defendant (Tantuico v. Republic,
204 SCRA 428).
It is the essential facts constituting the plaintiffs cause of action. A fact
is essential if it cannot be stricken out without leaving the statement of the
cause insufficient (Villalon v. Buendia, 245 SCRA 599).
Evidentiary facts (factum probans) are those which tend to prove or
establish the ultimate facts (Far East Marble Phil. V. CA, 225 SCRA 249).
Evidentiary facts are those facts which are necessary for the
determination of the ultimate facts; they are the premises on which
conclusions of ultimate are based. They are facts which furnish evidence of
the existence of the facts (Tantuico case).
3. What are the kinds of Evidence?
Ans:
Evidence may be generally classified in the following:
a. Real (object) evidence- it is also known as autoptic evidence. It
refers to knowledge
acquired by the court from inspection
or by direct self-perception or autopsy of
the evidence.
court. (Sec 1, Rule

Objects as evidence are those addressed to the senses of the


130)

b. Circumstantial evidence which indirectly proves a fact in issue. The


fact-finder must
draw an inference or reason from the
circumstantial evidence.
c. Testimonial evidence refers to oral evidence or that which a witness
testifies in court.
It includes oral written evidence, such as
documentary evidence, depositions
and affidavits.

4. What is the hierarchy of evidentiary values?


Ans:
Proof beyond reasonable doubt, which is required for conviction of an
accused in a
criminal case, means that which is the logical and inevitable
result of the evidence on record,
exclusive of any other consideration, of
moral certainty of the guilt of the accused or that degree of proof which produces
conviction in an unprejudiced mind (People v Bacalso, 191 SCRA 557). Moral
certainty only required.
Clear and convincing evidence refers to that measure or degree of
proof which will
produce in the mind of the trier of facts a firm belief or
conviction as to the allegations sought to
be established; it is more
preponderance but not to the extent of such moral certainty as is
required
beyond reasonable doubt as in criminal cases.
Preponderance of evidence, which is the degree of evidence required
in civil cases,
means that which is of greater weight or more convincing than
that which is offered in
opposition to it (People v. Tranca, 235 SCRA 455).
Substantial evidence is that which is required to reach a conclusion in
administrative
proceedings or to establish a fact before administrative and
quasi-judicial bodies (Velasquez v.
Nery, 211 SCRA 28).
5. When is evidence admissible?
Ans:
Evidence is admissible when it is relevant to the issue and is not
excluded by the law or
these rules (Sec. 3, Rule 128).
Admissible evidence is evidence of such a character that the court is
bound to receive it,
that is, allow it to be introduced at the trial (People v.
Valdez, 341 SCRA 25).
In other words, an evidence to be admissible must both be relevant
and competent.
6. When is evidence relevant?
Ans:
Relevant or material evidence is one having any tendency to make the
existence of any
fact that is consequence to the determination of the action more
probable or less probable than it would be without the evidence.
7. Define judicial notice
Ans:
Judicial notice is the cognizance of certain facts which judge may
properly take or act
upon without proof because they are already known to
him, or because of that knowledge
which the judge is assumed to have.
9. What is an actionable document?
Ans:
Actionable document is a written instrument upon which plaintiffs
action or
defendants defense is founded, which must be pleaded in the pleading
by alleging the
substance of the document and attaching a copy thereof to the
pleading, or copying the instrument in the pleading (Sardane v. CA, 167 SCRA
524).

8. When is judicial notice mandatory?


Ans:
It is mandatory for the court to take judicial notice, without introduction
of evidence, of
the following:
a. the existence and territorial extent of states;
b. the states political history, forms of government and symbols of
nationality;
c. the law of nations;
d. the admiralty and maritime courts of the world and their seals;
e. the political constitution and history of the Philippines, the official
acts of the
legislative, executive and judicial
departments of the Philippines;
f. the laws of nature;
g. the measure of time; and
h. the geographical divisions of the country.
ANNOTATION:
A document may be considered real or object evidence
depending upon the
purpose for which it is offered. If the object is to examine
the age, the signature thereon, the
physical features or conditions of the
document itself, the same is considered real or object
evidence which the court
may vies for such purpose; but if the document is presented to prove its content,
it is documentary evidence.
9. Define Documentary evidence
Ans:
Documents as evidence of writings or any material containing letters,
words, numbers, figures, symbols or other modes of written expressions offered
as proof of their contents (Section 2, Rule 130).
10. What is the best evidence?
Ans:
The best evidence refers to that which the law or rules consider as the
best evidence to prove the fact in dispute. The best evidence is the evidence
which the case in its nature is susceptible and which is within the power of the
party to produce.
11. Is the rule in the production of original documents as evidence absolute? If not,
what are the
exceptions?
Ans:
As a general rule provided under Section 3, Rule 130, when the subject
of the inquiry is
the contents of a document, no evidence shall be admissible
other than the original document
itself, except in the following cases:
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 later 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 a public record in the custody of a public officer
or is recorded in
a public office.
12. Under the best evidence rule, what are those documents which are considered
originals?
Ans:
The original refers to the first written from which copies can be made,
or those the contents of which are the subject of inquiry.
Also, when the document is in two or more copies executed at or about
the same time,
with identical contents, all such are equally regarded as
originals.
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 entries are likewise
equally regarded as
originals. (See Section 4, Rule 130)
ANNOTATION:
The general rule is that secondary evidence is not
admissible unless it is shown that the primary evidence is unavailable as where it
is lost, destroyed, is beyond the jurisdiction of the court, or is in the hands of the
opposite party who, on due notice, fails to produce it, in which case he is required
to submit the best secondary evidence which exists and which is in his power to
produce. (Kneedler v. Paterno, 85 Phil 183)
But prior to the introduction of such secondary evidence, the
proponent must
establish the former existence of the document. The correct
order of proof is as follows:
existence; execution; loss; and contents.
Where the requisites for submission of a secondary evidence
have not been
complied with, copy of a document, not being the best evidence,
has no probative value even if admitted (Republic v. CA, 258 SCRA 223).
13. When original document is in adverse partys custody: what are the requisites
of the rule?
Ans:
a. opponents possession of the original documents;
b. reasonable notice to opponent produce the original;
c. satisfactory proof of its existence; and
d. failure or refusal of opponent to produce the original in court.
14. What is parole evidence rule?
Ans:
The parole evidence rule is a rule of evidence which states that when
the terms of an
agreement have been reduced to writing, it is considered as
containing all the terms agreed upon and there can be between the parties and
their successors in interest, no evidence of such
terms other than the contents
of the written agreement (See Section 9, Rule 130).
15. Is the parole evidence rule absolute?

Ans:
a. An intrinsic ambiguity, mistake or imperfection in the written
agreement;
b. the written failure of the written agreement to express the true
intent and agreement
of the parties thereto;
c. the validity of the written agreement; or
d. the existence of other terms agreed to by the parties or their
successors in interest
after the execution of the written
agreement.
Note: it must be put in issue in his pleading.
16. Who may be a witness?
Ans:
The general rule is that all persons who can perceive, and perceiving
can make known their perception to others, may be witnesses, except as the law
or rules provide otherwise.
Religious or political belief or interest in the
outcome of the case shall not be a ground for
disqualification.
17. Who are disqualified to be a witness?
Ans:
a. Those whose mental condition, at the time of their production for
examination, is
such that they are incapable of intelligent making known their
perception to others.
b. Children whose mental maturity is such as to render them incapable
of perceiving the facts respecting which they are examined and of relating them
truthfully;
c. During their marriage, neither the husband nor wife may testify for
or against the
other without the consent of the affected spouse, except in a
civil case by one against the other,
or in a criminal case for a crime committed
by one against the other or the latters direct
descendants or ascendants;
d. Dead- man rule/statute parties or assignors of parties to a case, or
persons in whose behalf a case is prosecuted, against an executor or administrator
or other representative of a
deceased person, or against a person of unsound
mind, upon a claim or demand against the
estate of such deceased person
or against such person of unsound mind, cannot testify as to any
matter of
fact occurring before the death of such deceased person before such person
because
of unsound mind
e. disqualification by reason of privilege communication
- husband and wife privilege
- Attorney-client privilege
- Physician-patient privilege
- priest-confessant privilege
- disclosure or examination of bank deposits
18. Distinguish admission from confession

Ans:
tend to
accused.

Admission is an acknowledgement of some fact or circumstances which


establish the ultimate fact in issue in a civil case or of the guilt of an

Confession is an express acknowledgement of guilt. It is generally


restricted to acknowledgement of guilt. It is a declaration made voluntarily and
without compulsion or
inducement by a person, stating or acknowledging that he
has committed or participated in the commission of the crime.
19. What do you mean by res inter alios acta?
Ans:
The rule ordains that the rights of a party cannot be prejudiced by an
act, declaration, or omission of another, except as otherwise provided.

20. Is it an absolute rule?


Ans:
No. The following are the exceptions:
a. admission by a co-partner which may admissible against the other partners
or the partnership
itself;
b. the admission by conspirator; which may be given in evidence against the
other conspirators;
and
c. admission by silence of a person for not doing or saying anything when an
act or declaration is
said against him his presence.
21. Requisites for admission by co-partner or agent; to be admissible
Ans:
a. the partnership or agency is proved by evidence other than the act
or declaration;
b. the act or declaration of a partner or agent of a party is done within
the scope of his
authority; and
c. he made the act or declaration during the existence of the
partnership or agency.
22. Requisites by admission by co-conspirators; to be admissible
Ans:
a. that the conspiracy be first proved by evidence other than the
admission itself;
b. that the admission relates to common object; and
c. that it has been made while the declarant was engaged in carrying
out the conspiracy.
23. Requisites of admission by silence; to be admissible
Ans:
a. that he heard and understood the statement;
b. that he was at liberty to interpose a denial;
c. that the statement was in respect to some matter affecting his rights
or in which he
was then interested, and calling, naturally,
for an answer;
d. that the facts were within knowledge; and
e. that the fact admitted or the inference to be drawn from his silence
would be
material to the issue.