REVISED RULES OF EVIDENCE

Evidence

- Is the means, as sanctioned by the Rules of Court of ascertaining in a judicial proceeding the
truth respecting a matter of fact (Section 1, Rule 128, Rules of Court)
- An evidence in order to be admissible should be relevant, material, and competent

COMPETENT – if the evidence offered is not excluded by law or the Rules of Court

RELEVANT – if it tends in any reasonable degree to establish the probability or improvability of a fact in
issue.

MATERIALITY – means that the evidence offered directly proves a fact in issue

NOTE: Presentation of evidence is incumbent on the parties because the court is presumed to be
unaware of the truthfulness of the facts propounded in a case.

Kinds of Evidence

A. Object (real) evidence

B. Documentary Evidence

1. Original Document Rule

2. Secondary Evidence

3. Parol Evidence Rules

4. Interpretation of Document

C. Testimonial Evidence

Proof of Evidence

- Evidence is the means by which proof is established while proof is the result or perfection of
evidence. And evidence or pieces of evidence combined together may or may not be deemed
proof of a person’s guilt depending upon other facts shown in the case.

Equipoise Rule or Equiponderance Doctrine

- The equipoise rule provides that where the evidence in a criminal case is evenly balances, the
constitutional presumption of innocence tilts the scales in favor of the accused. Where the
inculpatory facts and circumstances are capable of two (2) or more explanations, one of which is
consistent with the innocence of the accuses and the other consistent with his guilt, then the
evidence does not fulfill the test of moral certainty and is not sufficient to support a conviction.
 - In civil case, when the evidence on an issue of fact is equipoise or there is doubt as to which side
the evidence preponderates, the party having the burden of proof falls upon that issue. Where
neither party is able to establish the cause of action and prevail with the evidence it has, the
courts have no choice but to leave them as they are and dismiss the complaint/petition.
- For better understanding read: 2019 Proposed Amendments to the Revised Rules on Evidence,
under A.M No. 19-08-15-SC

Electronic Evidence

- Under the rules, AN ELECTRONIC DOCUMENT refers to information or the representation of

information, data, figures, symbols or other modes of written expression, described or however
represented, by which a right is established or an obligation extinguished, or by which a fact
may be proved and affirmed, which is received, recorded, transmitted, stored, processed,
retrieved or produced electronically.
- It includes digitally signed documents and any printout or output, readable by sight or other
means, which accurately reflects the electronic data message or electronic document. The term
“electronic documents,” as provided for under the rules, is interchangeable with the term
“electronic data message.”
- Under SC A.M. No. 01-7-01, effective October 14,2002, the rules on electronic evidence shall
apply to all criminal, civil and quasi-judicial cases.
- On June 8, 2000 Congress enacted RA No. 8792 “Electronic Commerce Act of 2000,” pursuant to
the State’s cognizance of the vital roles of information and communication technology (ICT) in
nation-building. The Act aims to facilitate all kinds of domestic and international dealings for the
purpose of expediting the development of the nation, Its sphere of application encompasses any
kind of data message and electronic document used in the context of commercial and non-
commercial activity. The exchanged of information, commodities, services and payments would
then be facilitated, resulting in the creation of an institutional infrastructure. Shippers or
producers of goods, marketplace or online buyers and sellers, movement of information and
money are just among the myriad of players and chattels covered by the “Electronic Commerce
Act of 2000”

Judgments/Final Orders and Rendition of Judgment/Final Orders

- A judgment is one that finally disposes of a case leaving nothing more for the court to do with
respect to it. It is an adjudication of the merits considering the evidence presented at the trial
which declares categorically what the rights and the obligations of the parties are. It may also be
an order or judgment that dismisses an action.
- Rendition of judgment is the filing of the signed decision with the clerk of court. The mere
pronouncement of the judgment in open court with the stenographer taking note thereof does
not constitute a rendition of the judgment.
Entry of Judgment and Final Order

- Judgment or final order becomes executory upon the expiration of the period to appeal from a
decision or order that finally disposes of the action or proceeding, if no appeal has been duly
perfected. A judgment also becomes executory after an appeal taken from the judgment or
order has been finally resolved. (Section 1, Rule 39, Rules of Court)

Doctrine of Finality/Immutability of Judgment

- Under the Final Judgment Rule, appeals are allowed only after all the issues involved in a
particular lawsuit have been finally determined by the trial court. This limitation rests on the
theory that piecemeal appeals are oppressive and costly and that optimal appellate review is
achieved by the trial court. A decision that has acquired finality becomes immutable and
unalterable and may no longer be modified in any respect even if the modification is meant to
correct erroneous conclusions of fact and law; whether it be made by the court that rendered it
or by the highest court of the land
- In Hernan v Sandiganbayan, the SC said: “When however, circumstances transpire after the
finality of the decision rendering its execution unjust and inequitable, the Court may sit en banc
give due regard to such exceptional circumstance warranting the relaxation of the doctrine of
immutability.

Execution

- Execution is a remedy afforded by law for the enforcement of a judgment, its object being to
obtain satisfaction of the judgment on which the writ is issued. It issues by order a quo on
motion of the judgment oblige upon finality of judgment or order sought to be enforced.
 SALIENT POINTS OF THE 2019 PROPOSED AMENDMENTS TO THE REVISED RULES ON EVIDENCE

[The Supreme Court, in A.M. No. 19-08-15-SC dated 8 October 2019, approved the “2019 Proposed
Amendments to the Revised Rules on Evidence”. The amendments took effect on 1 May 2020. The
complete text, with original and amendments properly marked, is reproduced in a separate post. Here
are the salient points.]

SALIENT POINTS

1. Court may now take judicial notice of matters during pre-trial. [Rule 129, Sec. 3]

2. “Sounds,” “recordings” and “photographs” are added as documentary evidence. The provision defines
“photographs” to include still pictures, drawings, stored images, x-ray films, motion pictures or videos.
[Rule 130, Sec. 2]

3. For the section title, “best evidence rule” is deleted and substituted with “original document rule.”
[Rule 130 (B)(1)]

4. The 2019 Amendments deletes practically the entire section (save the section title), and replaced it
with a new definition of “original” and “duplicate”. The treatment of a duplicate of the original is
likewise provided. [Rule 130, Sec. 4]

 (a) An “original” of a document is the document itself or any counterpart intended to have the
same effect by a person executing or issuing it. An “original” of a photograph includes the
negative or any print therefrom. If data is stored in a computer or similar device, any printout or
other output readable by sight or other means, shown to reflect the data accurately, is an
“original.”

 (b) A “duplicate” is a counterpart produced by the same impression as the original, or from the
same matrix, or by means of photography, including enlargements and miniatures, or by
mechanical or electronic re-recording, or by other equivalent techniques which accurately
reproduce the original.

 (c) A duplicate is admissible to the same extent as an original unless (1) a genuine question is
raised as to the authenticity of the original, or (2) in the circumstances, it is unjust or inequitable
to admit the duplicate in lieu of the original. 

5. A new section is added, which basically provides that charts or summaries may be presented in lieu of
voluminous documents, and the fact sought to be established is only the general result. [Rule 130, Sec.
7]

6. Section 36 of the old Rules was moved and renumbered Section 22 (Testimony confined to personal
knowledge). The old subchapter 5 (Testimonial Knowledge), which contains what is now Section 22, was
deleted.  [Rule 130, Sec. 22]

7. Sec. 23, on disqualification by reason of mental incapacity or immaturity, was transposed and is now
Sec. 39, as amended. [Rule 130, Sec. 23]
8. On marital disqualification, the old Rules requires consent of the other spouse before a spouse can
testify for or against the other. The consent is now necessary only when a spouse testifies against the
other. [Rule 130, Sec. 23]

9. Substantial changes have been made with respect to disqualification by reason of privileged
communication (Sec. 24, R130). First and foremost, the 2019 Amendments expands the coverage of the
privileged communication to persons other than the parties involved, but also “even in the hands of a
third person who may have obtained the information, provided that the original parties to the
communication took reasonable precaution to protect its confidentiality.”

Lawyers. With respect to lawyers, the confidentiality now extends to “any person assisting the attorney”
and even to a “person reasonably believed by the client to be licensed to engage in the practice of law.
The old Rules does not contain exceptions. The 2019 Amendments adds the following exceptions:

 (i) Furtherance of crime or fraud. If the services or advice of the lawyer were sought or obtained
to enable or aid anyone to commit or plan to commit what the client knew or reasonably should
have known to be a crime or fraud;

 (ii) Claimants through same deceased client. As to a communication relevant to an issue

between parties who claim through the same or deceased client, regardless of whether the
claims are by testate or intestate or by inter vivos transaction;

 (iii) Breach of duty by lawyer or client. As to a communication relevant to an issue of breach of

duty by the lawyer to his or her client, or by the client to his or her lawyer;

 (iv) Document attested by the lawyer. As to a communication relevant to an issue concerning an

attested document to which the lawyer is an attesting witness; or

 (v) Joint clients. As to a communication relevant to a matter of common interest between two or

more clients if the communication was made by any of them to a lawyer retained or consulted
in common, when offered in an action between any of the clients, unless they have expressly
agreed otherwise.

Doctors/Psychotherapists. The 2019 Amendments also totally revamped the confidentiality of

communications with medical practitioners. In the old Rules, privileged communication covers “a person
authorized to practice medicine, surgery or obsterics”. Under the 2019 Amendments, the following are
covered:

 Physician
 Psychotherapist. A “psychotherapist” is a person licensed: (a) to practice medicine engaged in
the diagnosis or treatment of a mental or emotional condition, or (b) as a psychologist by the
government while similarly engaged.
 Person reasonably believed by the patient to be authorized to practice medicine or
psychotherapy
 Persons, including members of the patient’s family, who have participated in the diagnosis or
treatment of the patient under the direction of the physician or psychotherapist. 
The privileged matters cover any confidential communication made for the purpose of diagnosis or
treatment of the patient’s physical, mental or emotional condition, including alcohol or drug addiction,
between the patient and his or her physician or psychotherapist. [Rule 130, Sec. 24]

The old Rules covers priests and ministers. The 2019 Amendments now covers a “person reasonably
believed to be so”. [Rule 130, Sec. 24]

10. As to parental and filial privilege, an express exception is added under the 2019 Amendments —
when the “testimony is indispensable in a crime against that person or by one parent against the other.”
[Rule 130, Sec 25]

11. A new section is added, on privilege relating to trade secrets: “A person cannot be compelled to
testify about any trade secret, unless the non-disclosure will conceal fraud or otherwise work injustice.
When disclosure is directed, the court shall take such protective measures as the interest of the owner
of the trade secret and of the parties and the furtherance of justice may require.” [Rule 130, Sec. 26]

12. On offers of compromise, the 2019 Amendments adds that in civil cases, neither is evidence of
conduct nor statements made in compromise negotiations admissible, except evidence otherwise
discoverable or offered for another purpose, such as providing bias or prejudice of a witness, negativing
a contention of undue delay, or proving an effort to obstruct a criminal investigation or prosecution.

13. As to a plea of guilty later withdrawn or an unaccepted offer of a plea of guilty to a lesser offense,
the 2109 Amendments adds that “any statement made in the course of plea bargaining with the
prosecution, which does not result in a plea of guilty or which results in a plea of guilty later withdrawn,”
is not admissible. [Rule 130, Sec. 28]

14. On admission by co-partner or agent, the 2019 Amendments includes the act or declaration of a

partner or agent “authorized by the party to make a statement concerning the subject,” in addition to
the previous provision covering the act or declaration “within the scope of his or her authority and
during the existence of the partnership or agency”. [Rule 130, Sec. 30]

15. The 2019 Amendments adds “burden of evidence” to Section 1, on burden of proof. Burden of proof
never shifts, while the burden if evidence shifts. Burden of evidence is the duty of the party to present
evidence sufficient to establish or rebut a fact in issue to establish a prima facie case. [Rule 131, Sec. 1]

16. Among the heavily amended portions pertain to the rule on hearsay. The definition of hearsay,
which is different from the definition in the old Rules, is: “Hearsay is a statement other than one made
by the declarant while testifying at a trial or hearing, offered to prove the truth of facts asserted
therein.” [Rule 130, Sec. 37]

17. There are changes to the exceptions to the hearsay rule, the most significant of which is the addition
of a new provision on “residual exception”: A statement not specifically covered by any of the foregoing
exceptions, having equivalent circumstantial guarantees of trustworthiness, is admissible if the court
determines that (a) the statement is offered as evidence of a material fact; (b) the statement is more
probative on the point for which it is offered than any other evidence which the proponent can procure
through reasonable efforts; and (c) the general purposes of these rules and the interests of justice will
be best served by admission of the statement into evidence. However, a statement may not be admitted
under this exception unless the proponent makes known to the adverse party, sufficiently in advance of
the hearing, or by the pre-trial stage in the case of a trial of the main case, to provide the adverse party
with a fair opportunity to prepare to meet it, the proponent’s intention to offer the statement and the
particulars of it, including the name and address of the declarant. [Rule 130, Sec. 50]

18. The 2019 Amendments adds two new provisions, on presumptions in civil cases and presumptions in
criminal cases. In civil actions,  a presumption imposes on the party against whom it is directed the
burden of going forward with evidence to rebut or meet the presumptions. If presumptions are
inconsistent, the presumption that is founded upon weightier considerations of policy shall apply. If
considerations of policy are of equal weight, neither presumption applies. [Rule 131, Sec. 6]

Im criminal cases, if a presumed fact that established guilt, is an element of the offense charged, or
negates a defense, the existence of the basic fact must be proved beyond reasonable doubt and the
presumed fact follows from the basic fact beyond reasonable doubt and the presumed fact follows from
the basic fact beyond reasonable doubt. [Rule 131, Sec. 6]

19. There is a significant change on the scope of cross-examination. Under the old  Rules, the scope is
any matter stated in the direct examination. Under the 2019 Amendments, cross-examination covers
“any relevant matter”. [Rule 132, Sec. 8]

20. The 2019 Amendments adds a new provision, pertaining to impeachment by evidence of conviction

of crime. For the purpose of impeaching a witness, evidence that he or she has been convicted by final
judgment of a crime shall be admitted if (a) the crime was punishable by a penalty of excess of one year;
or (b) the crime involved moral turpitude, regardless of the penalty. However, evidence of a conviction is
not admissible if the conviction has been the subject of amnesty or annulment of the conviction.  [Rule
132, Sec. 12]

21. On the exclusion of witnesses, the 2019 Amendments adds a new paragraph to Sec. 15, which reads:
The court, motu propio or upon motion, shall order witnesses excluded so that they cannot hear the
testimony of other witnesses. This rule does not authorize exclusion of (a) a party who is a natural
person, (b) a duly designated representative of a juridical entity which is a party to the case; (c) a person
whose presence is essential to the presentation of the party’s cause, or (d) a person authorized by a
statute to be present. [Rule 132, Sec. 15]

22. Public documents now include documents that are considered public documents under treatises and
conventions which are in force between the Philippines and the country of source. [Rule 132, Sec. 19]