DE LA PAZ JR. v.

IAC

FACTS: De la Paz filed a complaint against petitioners for a judicial declaration of ownership of a land
registered in the name of Ponciano de la Paz, alleging that the land was among the properties
adjudicated to her and her mother. Petitioners claimed that the land was not accounted for in the
probate proceedings of Ponciano de la Paz.

Loreto was last on crossexamination, but was not completed. Petitioners’ counsel resumed his
repeatedly postponed crossexamination. The crossexamination was, again rescheduled again on motion
of the petitioners’ counsel. Unfortunately, Loreto died. At the resumption of the trial, petitioners moved
to strike off the record the entire testimony of Loreto, which was denied.

ISSUE: WON the testimony of Loreto should be stricken off the record due to lack of cross-examination
of the adverse parties?

RATIO: No. The right of a party to confront and cross-examine opposing witnesses in a judicial litigation,
is fundamental right which is part of due process. Until such cross-examination has been finished, the
testimony of the witness cannot be considered as complete and may not be allowed to form part of the
evidence to be considered by the court in deciding the case. In the case at bar, petitioners’ failure to
cross-examine Loreto is due to its own fault of repeatedly postponing the crossexamination and failing
to appear during scheduled hearings.