Salcedo-Ortañez vs.

Court of Appeals
235 SCRA 111 (1994)

FACTS:

Rafael Ortañez filed a complaint for annulment of

marriage with damages against his wife Teresita Salcedo-
Ortañez, on grounds of lack of marriage license and/or
psychological incapacity of Teresita. Among the exhibits
offered by Rafael were three (3) cassette tapes
of alleged telephone conversations between Teresita and
unidentified persons. These tape recordings were made
and obtained when Rafael allowed his friends from the military
to wiretap his home telephone. Teresita objected to Rafael’s oral
offer of the said tapes. However, the Regional Trail Court
(RTC) of Quezon City admitted the tapes into evidence but the
CA upheld the lower court’s order. Tape recordings are not
inadmissible per se. They are admissible depending on how
they are presented and offered and how the trial judge utilizes
them

ISSUE:

W h e t h e r o r n o t t h e r e c o r d i n g s o f T e r e s i t a ’s
p h o n e c o n ve r s at i o n s , m ad e an d o b t ai n e d through
wiretapping are admissible as evidence (not per se inadmissible

RULING:

The tape recordings are inadmissible. Relevant provisions of

R.A. 4200 (Anti-Wiretapping Act) provides that:

Section 1:
It shall be unlawful for any person, not being authorized by all parties
to any private conversation or spoken
word, to tap any wire or cable, or by using any other device or
arrangement, to secretly overhear, intercept, or record such
communication or spoken word by using a device commonly
known as a dictaphone, or dictagraph or detectaphone or
walkie-talkie or tape recorder, or however otherwise described x x x
3C 2003-2004 Evidence ProjectVol. 1 - 17 -

Section 4.
Any communication, or spoken word, or the existence, contents,
substance, purport, or meaning of the same or any part thereof
, or any information thereincontained, obtained, or secured by
any person in violation of the preceding section of this Act
shall not be admitted in evidence in any judicial, quasi-
judicial, legislative, or administrative hearing or investigation.
Hence, absent any clear showing that both parties
consented to the recording, theinadmissibility of the tapes is
mandatory under R.A. No. 4200