You are on page 1of 3

PNOC SHIPPING AND TRANSPORT MEFC presented of the testimony of its general

CORPORATION, PETITIONER, V. HONORABLE manager and sole witness, Edilberto del Rosario. In
COURT OF APPEALS AND MARIA EFIGENIA addition, MEFC offered the following pieces of
FISHING CORPORATION, GR 107518, 1998 documentary evidence:
Exhibits A: A certified xerox copy of the certificate
of ownership of M/V Maria Efigenia XV;
Price quotations are not commercial lists if they are B: a document stating that as a result of the
not published in any list, register, periodical or other collision, the M/V Maria Efigenia XV sustained a
compilation on the relevant subject matter. Neither hole at its left side that caused it to sink with its
are they market reports or quotations within the cargo of 1,050 baeras valued at P170,000.00;
purview of commercial lists as they are not standard C: a quotation for the construction of a 95-footer
handbooks or periodicals, containing data of trawler;
everyday professional need and relied upon in the
work of the occupation. D: pro forma invoice showing 2 units of
CUMMINS Marine Engine model N855-M, 195
Facts bhp. at 1800 rpm. would cost P1,160,000.00;
M/V Maria Efigenia XV, owned by Maria Efigenia E: quotation of prices showing that a unit of radar,
Fishing Corporation (MEFC), navigated the waters would cost P100,000.00, a unit of video sounder
near Fortune Island in Nasugbu, Batangas on its would cost P45,000.00;
way to Navotas, Metro Manila when it collided with F: quotation of prices showing how much 2 rolls of
the vessel Petroparcel. Luzon Stevedoring nylon rope would cost xxx;
Corporation (LSC) owned Petroparcel. After
investigation, Philippine Coast Guard Commandant G: retainer agreement between Del Rosario and F.
Simeon N. Alejandro found the Petroparcel at fault. Sumulong Associates Law Offices;
MEFC sued LSC and the Petroparcel captain, H: price quotation showing the cost of poly nettings
Edgardo Doruelo. MEFC prayed for an award xxx.
of P692,680.00, allegedly representing the value of
the fishing nets, boat equipment and cargoes of M/V
Maria Efigenia XV, with interest at the legal rate Are the abovementioned exhibits admissible in
plus 25% thereof as attorney’s fees. evidence?
Meanwhile, during the pendency of the case, Answer
petitioner PNOC Shipping and Transport No. The price quotations presented as exhibits
Corporation sought to be substituted in place of partake of the nature of hearsay evidence
LSC as it had already acquired ownership of considering that the persons who issued them were
the Petroparcel. not presented as witnesses. Any evidence, whether
MEFC later sought to amend its complaint because oral or documentary, is hearsay if its probative value
the original complaint failed to plead for the is not based on the personal knowledge of the
recovery of the lost value of the hull of M/V Maria witness but on the knowledge of another person
Efigenia XV. MEFC averred that M/V Maria who is not on the witness stand. Hearsay evidence,
Efigenia XV had an actual value of P800,000.00 and whether objected to or not, has no probative value
that, after deducting the insurance payment unless the proponent can show that the evidence
of P200,000.00, the amount of P600,000.00 should falls within the exceptions to the hearsay evidence
be claimed. MEFC also alleged that inflation rule. On this point, the exhibits do not fall under any
resulting from the devaluation of the Philippine of the exceptions provided under Sections 37 to 47
peso had affected the replacement value of the hull of Rule 130.
of the vessel, its equipment and its lost cargoes. Nor are B, C, D, E, F, and H commercial lists for
MEFC also incurred unrealized profits and lost they do not belong to the category of other
business opportunities. published compilations under Section 45. Under
the principle of ejusdem generis, where general
words follow an enumeration of persons or things, MEFC is entitled to nominal damages. In the
by words of a particular and specific meaning, such absence of competent proof on the actual damage
general words are not to be construed in their widest suffered, private respondent is entitled to nominal
extent, but are to be held as applying only to damages which, as the law says, is adjudicated in
persons or things of the same kind or class as those order that a right of the plaintiff, which has been
specifically mentioned. The exhibits mentioned are violated or invaded by defendant, may be vindicated
mere price quotations issued personally to Del and recognized, and not for the purpose of
Rosario who requested for them from dealers of indemnifying the plaintiff for any loss suffered.
equipment similar to the ones lost at the collision of Since Petroparcel was at fault, petitioner is liable
the two vessels. These are not published in any for nominal damages to respondent.
list, register, periodical or other compilation on
the relevant subject matter. Neither are these
market reports or quotations within the purview of MAYOR EMMANUEL L. MALIKSI V.
commercial lists as these are not standard COMMISSION ON ELECTIONS AND HOMER T.
handbooks or periodicals, containing data of SAQUILAVAN, GR 203302, 2013
everyday professional need and relied upon in the Principle
work of the occupation. These are simply letters
responding to the queries of Del Rosario. The picture images of the ballots are electronic
documents that are regarded as the functional
Under Section 45, a document is a commercial list equivalents of the original official ballots
if: themselves. As such, they have the same evidentiary
1. it is a statement of matters of interest to weight.
persons engaged in an occupation; Facts
2. such statement is contained in a list, register, During the 2010 Elections, the Municipal Board of
periodical or other published compilation; Canvassers proclaimed Saquilayan the winner for
3. said compilation is published for the use of the position of Mayor of Imus, Cavite. Maliksi, the
persons engaged in that occupation, and candidate who garnered the second highest number
of votes, brought an election protest in the Regional
4. it is generally used and relied upon by Trial Court (RTC) in Imus, Cavite alleging that
persons in the same occupation. there were irregularities in the counting of votes in
Question 209 clustered precincts. Subsequently, the RTC held
a revision of the votes, and, based on the results of
Is MEFC entitled to award of damages?
the revision, declared Maliksi as the duly elected
Answer Mayor of Imus commanding Saquilayan to cease
Yes. But MEFC is not entitled to actual damages. and desist from performing the functions of said
To enable an injured party to recover actual or office. Saquilayan appealed to the COMELEC. In
compensatory damages, he is required to prove the the meanwhile, the RTC granted Maliksi’s motion
actual amount of loss with reasonable degree of for execution pending appeal, and Maliksi was then
certainty premised upon competent proof and on the installed as Mayor.
best evidence available. The burden of proof is on In resolving the appeal, the COMELEC First
the party who would be defeated if no evidence Division, without giving notice to the parties,
would be presented on either side. He must establish decided to recount the ballots through the use of the
his case by a preponderance of evidence which printouts of the ballot images from the CF cards.
means that the evidence, as a whole, adduced by Thus, it issued an order dated March 28, 2012
one side is superior to that of the other. In other requiring Saquilayan to deposit the amount
words, damages cannot be presumed and courts, in necessary to defray the expenses for the decryption
making an award must point out specific facts that and printing of the ballot images. Later, it issued
could afford a basis for measuring whatever another order dated April 17, 2012 for Saquilayan to
compensatory or actual damages are borne. augment his cash deposit.
On August 15, 2012, the First Division issued a decrypted images take place during the revision or
resolution nullifying the RTC’s decision and recount proceedings. There is a good reason for thus
declaring Saquilayan as the duly elected Mayor. fixing where and by whom the decryption and the
printing should be conducted. It is during the
Maliksi filed a motion for reconsideration, alleging
revision or recount conducted by the
that he had been denied his right to due process
Revision/Recount Committee when the parties are
because he had not been notified of the decryption
allowed to be represented, with their
proceedings. He argued that the resort to the
representatives witnessing the proceedings and
printouts of the ballot images, which were
timely raising their objections in the course of the
secondary evidence, had been unwarranted because
proceedings. Moreover, whenever the
there was no proof that the integrity of the paper
Revision/Recount Committee makes any
ballots had not been preserved.
determination that the ballots have been tampered
Question and have become unreliable, the parties are
Do printouts of the ballot images have the same immediately made aware of such determination.
evidentiary value as the official ballots? When, as in the present case, it was not the
Answer Revision/Recount Committee or the RTC exercising
original jurisdiction over the protest that made the
Yes. The picture images of the ballots are electronic finding that the ballots had been tampered, but the
documents that are regarded as the equivalents of First Division in the exercise of its appellate
the original official ballots themselves. In Vinzons- jurisdiction, the parties should have been given a
Chato v. House of Representatives Electoral formal notice thereof.
Tribunal, the Court held that the picture images of
the ballots, as scanned and recorded by the PCOS, Thus, since Comelec First Division did not notify
are likewise ‘official ballots’ that faithfully capture Maliksi, the Commission on Elections En Banc
in electronic form the votes cast by the voter, as should conduct proceedings for the decryption of
defined by Section 2(3) of R.A. No. 9369. As such, the picture images of the ballots involved in the
the printouts are the functional equivalent of the protest after due authentication, and for the recount
paper ballots filled out by the voters and, thus, may of ballots by using the printouts of the ballot
be used for purposes of revision of votes in an images, with notice to and in the presence of the
electoral protest. parties or their representatives.

That the two documents—the official ballot and its

picture image—are considered "original
documents" simply means that both of them are
given equal probative weight. In short, when either
is presented as evidence, one is not considered as
weightier than the other.
Did Comelec First Division deprive Maliksi of his
right to due process?
Yes. Section 6, Rule 15 of COMELEC Resolution
No. 8804 as amended by COMELEC Resolution
No. 9164; Section 6, Rule 10 (Conduct of Revision)
of the 2010 Rules of Procedure for Municipal
Election Contests; and 2010 Rules of the
Presidential Electoral Tribunal stipulate that the
printing of the picture images of the ballots may be
resorted to only after the proper Revision/Recount
Committee has first determined that the integrity of
the ballots and the ballot boxes was not preserved.
They further require that the decryption of the
images stored in the CF cards and the printing of the