RULE 128
 In legal acceptation, evidence includes all the means by which any
SECTION 1. Evidence defined. — Evidence is the means, sanctioned
by these rules, of ascertaining in a judicial proceeding the truth
respecting a matter of fact.
MORAL – inferior kind of certainty
MORAL PROBABILITY – erroneously termed as moral certainty, is the
utmost to which the science of legal evidence aspires
WHERE DOES EVIDENCE LIES? Exclusively between moral certainty (as
most perfect extreme) and moral possibility (as most imperfect extreme)
WHAT IS THE WHOLE OBJECT OF EVIDENCE? To produce
convictions with spring spontaneously from suggestions of intuition,
as embodied in conclusions of reasoning or comparative faculty of
the mind.
o In every case, the last conclusion of speculative intellect
rightly suggests and governs the first outward operation of
the practical mind.
ADVERSARY SYSTEM
 The responsibility if bringing a suit for shaping the issues ad
producing evidence rests almost entirely upon the parties to the
controversy
o The court does not take active part, it does not do its own
investigation and it rarely asks questions
General theory of adversarial model– self-interest of each party to the
litigation will produce the evidence and the competing arguments
necessary for the trier to make a fair and rational decision
 Adversarial system is driven by the parties, one of whom (the
plaintiff) initiate the lawsuit by filing a complaint or information
ESSENCE OF EVIDENCE
 In original sense, evidence is that from which causes the state of
being evident or plain
alleged matter of fact, the truth of which is submitted for
investigation, is established or disproved,
THREE (3) LEGITIMATE MEANINGS OF EVIDENCE (According to
Gulson)
1. Science of proof, fundamental principle which regulates the art of
proving
2. Art of proof, rules and methods in application of science of proof to
practice
3. Physical means, by which the art of proof is carried into effect
(forensic procedure)
RULE OF EVIDENCE – principle expressing the mode and manner of
proving the facts and circumstances upon which a party relies to establish
a fact in dispute in judicial procedure
 It governs the presentation of facts before a legal tribunal
 Dependent on rules of selectivity and exclusion
 It is not legally viable to create a rule of evidence by sheer
stipulation of the parties:
 It is essential to the securing of uniformity in the
administration of justice, and for obvious reasons, that the
controlling rules of evidence be prescribed by the
public, acting through their legislatures and courts
 Individuals and parties litigant cannot, by private contract, stipulate
rules of evidence that shall be binding on the courts
 While the parties are at liberty to waive a rule of evidence, no valid
waiver can extend to a rule of evidence anchored on public policy.
 Example: the waiver of the privilege against disclosure of
state secrets is void.
PURPOSE OF RULE OF EVIDENCE – to get at the truth, not to
suppress it
FACTUM PROBANS – evidentiary facts which establish the proposition
Example:
 Proposition – Murder was committed by John Doe
  Factum probans – John Doe left the victim’s house shortly after the
murder, his shoes fit the track left near the house or he was seen in
the CCTV footage coming out of the house
FACTUM PROBANDUM – the ultimate fact or the proposition to be
established
Example: Prove that the murder was committed by John Doe by offering
evidentiary facts
FACT – the truth, the existence, and actuality of things. It may be tangible
or intangible.
Note: For a viable pleading, it must aver sufficient ultimate facts rather than
evidentiary facts.
Pleading – written statement of claims and defenses of the parties,
submitted to the court for appropriate judgment.
TWO (2) KINDS OF FACTS
1. Ultimate facts
2. Evidentiary facts
ULTIMATE FACTS – principal, determinative, constitutive facts upon the
existence of which, the entire cause of action rests
 Ultimate facts are essential facts constituting the cause of action/
facts that constitute the cause of action
 Important and substantial facts which either directly form the basis
of primary right and duty, or directly make up the wrongful acts or
omissions of the defendant
 Ultimate facts are tested during trial by evidentiary facts
When is the fact essential?
When the fact cannot be stricken out without leaving the statement
of the cause of action insufficient
How ultimate facts are proved?
The veracity of ultimate facts will be established during the trial
through the presentation of evidence that will prove evidentiary
facts.
EVIDENTIARY FACTS – those which tend to prove or establish the
ultimate facts/ facts necessary for determination of ultimate facts
 Evidentiary facts are premises upon which conclusions of ultimate
facts are based
ISSUE – a question of whether a claim is true or not, it is the proposition to
be maintained or controverted
 Written allegations of the parties, directly affirmed on one side, and
denied on the other
 The court has nothing to do with the progress of altercation,
EXCEPT to see that it is conducted in the forms of law.
 If it is a proposition of fact, it is to be tried by the jury, upon the
evidence adduced.
How issue is formed? It is formed by the parties through their
attorneys.
RULES IN THE PRODUCTION OF EVIDENCE
1. FIRST, the evidence offered must correspond with the
allegations, and be confined to the point in issue.
2. SECOND, it is sufficient, if the substance of the issue be
proved.
 In the application of this rule, a distinction is made between
allegations of matter of substance, and allegations of matter
of essential description.
i. Allegations of matter of substance – may be
substantially proved
ii. Allegations of matter of essential description –
must be proved with a degree of strictness,
extending in some cases even to literal precision.
KINDS OF ISSUE
1. General Issue –general and comprehensive denial of the whole
declaration, or of the principal part of it.
2. Special Issue – usually arises in some later stage of the pleadings;
the defendant specially pleads
HOW ISSUE ARISES?
 An issue arises if a party alleges a fact on a pleading and it is
disputed by the adverse party.
ABSENCE OF AN ISSUE
When is there no issue?
1. Where the Answer fails to tender an issue or otherwise admits the
material allegations of the adverse party’s pleading, the civil case
before the court is ordinarily ripe for a judgment on the pleadings, or
an immediate judgment of a civil case covered by summary
procedure.
2. If a material averment in the Complaint, other than those as to the
amount of unliquidated damages, is deemed admitted when it is not
specifically denied by the adverse party
3. As shortcuts to proof, neither is there an issue:
a. if the court avails of judicial notice of a matter before it
b. there is a judicial admission from a party
c. if a party laid the foundation for, or enjoys the benefit of, a
presumption.
THREE (3) MODES OF SPECIFIC DENIAL (SSS)
(Section 10, Rule 8 of the Rules of Court on Manner of Making Allegations
in Pleading)
1. Specifying each material allegation of the fact in the complaint,
the truth of which the defendant does not admit, and whenever
practicable, setting forth the substance of the matters which he will
rely upon to support his denial
2. Specifying so much of an averment in the complaint as is true
and material and denying only the remainder
3. Stating that the defendant is without knowledge or information
sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of a material averment
in the complaint, which has the effect of a denial.
PURPOSE OF SPECIFIC DENIAL
To make the defendant disclose the matters alleged in the complaint which
he succinctly intends to disprove at the trial, together with the matter which
he relied upon to support the denial.
 The parties are compelled to lay their cards on the table.
AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE
An allegation of a new matter which, while hypothetically admitting the
material allegations in the pleading of the claimant, would nevertheless
prevent or bar recovery by him.
 The affirmative defenses include fraud, Statute of limitations,
release, payment, illegality, statute of frauds, estoppel, former
recovery, discharge in bankruptcy, and any other matter by way of
confession and avoidance.
IN ORDINARY CIVIL CASES, the plaintiff has the burden of proving
the material allegations of the complaint which are denied by the
defendant, and the defendant has the burden of proving the material
allegations in his case where he sets up a new matter.
ALL FACTS IN ISSUE AND RELEVANT FACTS MUST, AS A GENERAL
RULE, BE PROVEN BY EVIDENCE EXCEPT the following:
1. Allegations contained in the complaint or answer
2. Immaterial to the issues.
3. Facts which are admitted or which are not denied in
4. The answer, provided they have been sufficiently alleged.
5. Those which are the subject of an agreed statement
6. Of facts between the parties; as well as those admitted by the
7. Party in the course of the proceedings in the same case.
8. Facts which are the subject of judicial notice.
9. Facts which are legally presumed
10. Facts peculiarly within the knowledge of the opposite party
IN A CRIMINAL CASE, the plea of the accused signals joinder of
issues and it would be jurisprudentially impermissible for an accused to
interpose a counterclaim for damages, primarily on account of the absence
of any specific rule therefor in a criminal proceeding,
Adjudication of compulsory counterclaims and/or related claims or
pleadings logically includes the application of other rules which, by their
very nature, apply only to civil actions.
THE FOLLOWING MATTERS MAY BE INVOKED IN CONNECTION
WITH THE FILING OF AN ANSWER WITH A COUNTERCLAIM:
1. Genuineness and due execution of an actionable document
which are deemed admitted unless specifically denied under oath
 2. Affirmative defenses like res judicata, prescription and statute
of frauds which are deemed waived by failure to interpose them as
affirmative defenses in an answer
3. Failure of a defendant to file an answer seasonably may result
in his default in the civil aspect but not in the criminal. As a
consequence of these matters, the entry of plea during arraignment
will no longer signal joinder of issues in a criminal action.”
WHEN THERE IS A NEED TO ASCERTAIN THE TRUTH
RESPECTING A MATTER OF FACT?
1. When a fact is in issue and the truth is ascertained by evidence,
in any of its forms or a combination thereof.”
ARGUMENT FROM EVIDENCE
Simply put, an argument is the piercing together of elemental facts for a
suggested conclusion while evidence connotes the process of presenting
assumed facts. The legitimate quality of Argumentation is the invocation,
by counsel, of ordinary rules of logic and rhetoric in the combination of
assumed facts
An argument is an effort to establish belief by a course of reasoning
 The object of evidence is to establish the truth by the use of
perceptive and reasoning faculties.
 In critical thinking, an argument gives a reason for thinking that a
claim is true, while a claim that is offered as a reason for believing
another claim is a premise. And the claim for which a premise is
supposed to give a reason is the conclusion of the argument.
SUSPICION AND CONJECTURE
Suspicion cannot give probative force to testimony which in itself is
insufficient to establish or to justify an inference of a particular fact.
Subject to the subsequent discussion on the value of a presumption in
Section 2 and Rule 3, Rule 131 of the Revised Rules on Evidence, settled
is the rule that a court cannot rely on speculations, conjectures or
guesswork, but must depend upon competent proof and on the basis
of the best-evidence obtainable under the circumstances.
Litigations-cannot be properly resolved by suppositions, deductions, or
even presumptions, with no basis in evidence, for the truth must have to
be determined by the hard rules of admissibility and proof.
QUESTION OF FACT FROM A QUESTION OF LAW
To be certain that he is acting in conformity with the law, the judge has, on
every occasion, two (2) points to consider;
1. Question of fact – assuring himself that a given fact existed in a
given place, at a given time
 Decided by evidence, all depends on facts2
 There is a question of fact when the doubt or controversy
arises or as to the truth or falsity of the alleged facts
 As when the query necessarily solicits calibration of
the whole evidence considering mostly the credibility
of witnesses, existence and relevance of specific
surrounding circumstances, their relation to each
other and to the whole, and probabilities of the
situation.
2. Question of law – assuring himself, that the law has laid down a
rule of such or such a nature, applicable to this individual fact
 Decided by the text of the law, or when there is no written
law, by previous decisions
 There is a question of law when a doubt or a difference
arises as to what the law is on a certain state of facts, and
the question does not call for an examination of the
probative value of the evidence presented by the parties-
litigants
 When there is no dispute as to the facts, the question of
whether the conclusion drawn therefrom is correct or
not, is a question of law
CONCLUSION OF FACT AND CONCLUSION OF LAW
1. Conclusion of fact – an inference drawn from the subordinate or
evidentiary facts
 E.g., the oral declaration of a daughter of appellant in rape
that she saw her father and AAA in the act of sexual
intercourse deserves scant consideration as she was not
present at the time of the commencement of the said act.
She could not, therefore, be in a position to state with
certainty that there was no struggle on the part of AAA.
 Hence, her testimony regarding such matter is a mere
conclusion of fact.
2. Conclusion of law – a proposition not arrived at by any process of
natural reasoning from a fact of facts stated, but by the application
of the artificial rules of law to the facts pleaded.
 A legal inference on a question of law made as a result of a
factual showing where no further evidence is required.
 Examples: General allegations that a contract is valid or
legal, or is just, fair and reasonable; allegations that a
contract is void, voidable, invalid, illegal, ultra vires, or
against public policy, without stating facts showing its
invalidity; labelling an obligation to have prescribed without
specifying the circumstances behind it is a mere conclusion
of law.
NOTES:
1. Conclusions of fact and law stated in the complaint are not
deemed admitted by the failure to make a specific denial.
This is true considering that only ultimate facts must be alleged
in any pleading and only material allegation of facts need to be
specifically denied.
2. A pleading should state the ultimate facts essential to the
rights of action or defense asserted, as distinguished from
mere conclusions of fact, or conclusions of law.
ALLEGATION, EVIDENCE, AND PROOF
1. Allegation – the assertion, declaration, or statement of a party to
an action, made in a pleading, setting out what he expects to prove
 Allegation is not evidence nor proof and the court cannot
rely on speculation
 No allegation, descriptive of the identity of that which is
legally essential to the claim or charge, can ever be
rejected.
2. Statement – a person’s oral assertion, written assertion, or non-
verbal conduct, if the person intended it as an assertion.
3. Proof – the result of sufficient evidence, it is the perfection of
evidence.
 Proof is the outcome of adequate evidence.
 When the fact in issue is established, proof is deemed to
have been attained
 a fact supposed to be true, and then considered as a reason
for believing in the existence or nonexistence of some other
fact
EVERY PROOF COMPREHENDS AT LEAST TWO (2)
DISTINCT FACTS:
1. Principal fact – the existence or nonexistence of which
is to be proved
2. Proving fact – employed to prove the verity or
falsehood of the principal fact
4. Evidence – bridges the gap between allegation and proof
 The true question therefore, in trials of fact, is not whether it
is possible that the testimony may be false, but whether
there is sufficient probability of its truth; that is, whether
the facts are shown by competent and satisfactory
evidence.
 Things established by competent and satisfactory evidence
are said to be proved.
 Before factum probans can lead to factum probandum, the
evidence must be properly presented, formally offered by
the proponent, admitted, and thereafter assessed by the
evaluator.
SANCTIONED BY THE RULES
RULE OF EVIDENCE – principle expressing the mode and manner of
proving the facts and circumstances upon which a party relies to establish
a fact in dispute in judicial procedure
 It is not legally viable to create a rule of evidence by sheer
stipulation of the parties:
 It is essential to the securing of uniformity in the
administration of justice, and for obvious reasons, that the
controlling rules of evidence be prescribed by the
public, acting through their legislatures and courts
 Individuals and parties litigant cannot, by private contract, stipulate
rules of evidence that shall be binding on the courts
 While the parties are at liberty to waive a rule of evidence, no valid
waiver can extend to a rule of evidence anchored on public policy.
  Example: the waiver of the privilege against disclosure of
state secrets is void.
PURPOSE OF RULE OF EVIDENCE – to get at the truth, not to
suppress it
NO VESTED RIGHT OF PROPERTY IN RULES OF EVIDENCE
The general rule is that there is no vested right of property in rules of
evidence.
TRUTH – either substantive truth, or actual truth, as opposed to formal
legal truth, or facts according to the fact-finder, irrespective of whether it
corresponds with the truth or not
Three (3) conceptions as to what constitutes truth:
1. Agreement of thought and reality
2. Eventual verification
3. Consistency of thought with itself
NOTES:
1. A legitimate claim — that is, one that makes sense — is either true
or false in the normal, common sense way.
2. Truth and falsity are properties of claims.
MATTER OF FACT – refers to a matter, the existence of which is
determined by the sense, or by reasoning based upon the evidence
 An allegation must have something to support the claim,
independently verifiable facts. evidencing ‘the truth respecting
a matter of fact’, that an analysis of causation and correlation
of such facts lead to an inescapable conclusion
 mere fact of its occurrence is not a matter of fact
MATTER OF LAW – refers to a matter, the truth or falsity of which is
determined by establishing the rules of law or by reasoning based upon
them
 Example: While imposition of legal interest in eminent domain is a
matter of law under Section 10, Rule 67, recovery thereof can be
impeded by other equally acknowledged principles in remedial law
such as res judicata or immutability of a previous judgment.
NOTES:
1. Under Section 1, Rule 128, evidence is the means of
ascertaining the truth of a “matter of fact” not of a “matter of
law.”
2. The rules of procedure must be faithfully followed and cannot be
ignored due to its indispensability for the orderly and speedy
discharge of the administration of justice. While rules of procedure
may be relaxed to better serve the ends of justice, the Court,
however, must take precaution as the exception to this tenet is
applied only to the most persuasive of reasons and the most
deserving.
SOURCES OF EVIDENCE (CSP)
1. Constitution
2. Substantive law
3. Procedural law
CONSTITUTION – Within the 1987 Constitution, rules of evidence
were mostly reflected in Article 3 on the Bill of Rights, inclusive
of the rule- making power of the Supreme Court in Section 5(5),
Article 8 on the -Judicial Department.
 Bill of Rights can only be invoked if there is
governmental interference
i. Bill of Rights is not meant to be invoked against acts
of private individuals.
 Protection against the state
The Bill of Rights governs the relationship between the
individual and the state. Its concern is not the relation
between individuals. What the Bill of Rights does is to
declare some forbidden zones in the private sphere
inaccessible to any power holder
 In laying down the principles of government and
fundamental liberties of the people, the Constitution did
not govern the relationships between individuals.
 Right to privacy
 Unreasonable search and seizures
SECTION 2. The right of the people to be secure in
their persons, houses, papers, and effects against
unreasonable searches and seizures of whatever
nature and for any purpose shall be inviolable, and
no search warrant or warrant of arrest shall issue
 except upon probable cause to be determined
personally by the judge after examination under oath
or affirmation of the complainant and the witnesses
he may produce, and particularly describing the place
to be searched and the persons or things to be
seized.
SECTION 3. (1) The privacy of communication and
correspondence shall be inviolable except upon
lawful order of the court, or when public safety or
order requires otherwise, as prescribed by law.
(2) Any evidence obtained in violation of this or
the preceding section shall be inadmissible for
any purpose in any proceeding.
 Administrative search (appears to be beyond the
context of an “unreasonable” invasion of privacy)
REASONABLENESS – the touchstone of the validity of
a government search or intrusion
 Whether a search at issue hews to the
reasonableness standard is judged by the
balancing of the government- mandated
intrusion on the individual’s privacy interest
against the promotion of some compelling state
interest.
 In the criminal context, reasonableness requires
showing of probable cause to be personally
determined by a judge.
 Unwarranted inquiry
 An attempt to pry on the motive of a Filipino in
marrying an alien may face constitutional
challenge under the concept of the right to privacy
 The State does not and cannot dictate on the kind
of life that a couple chooses to lead.
 Search of government office computer
 One of the circumstances EXEMPTED from the
warrant requirement – A search by a
government employer of an employee’s office is
justified at inception when there are reasonable
grounds for suspecting that it will turn up
evidence that the employee is guilty of work-
related misconduct.
 There can be legitimate intrusions into the
privacy of employees in the government
workplace (e.g., the computer from which the
personal files were retrieved is a government-
issued computer, hence government property
the use of which the government has absolute
right to regulate and monitor)
 Right to be forgotten
 Supplement to the right to privacy is the right to
an imperfect history and to suppress potentially
damaging internet information of a private
individual
 The right of an individual against obsolete digital
information can subordinate economic interest of
the operator of the search engine
 Private individual vs. private individual
 Violation of the Bill of Rights precisely as a
constitutional guarantee can be done only by
public officials. But almost all these liberties
are also guaranteed by Article 32 of the Civil
Code thus making private violations actionable
even if the violation does not have a
constitutional consequence such as the
applicability of the exclusionary rule.
 Privacy of communication and correspondence
 In unreasonable search, seizure and arrest, the
exclusionary rule forbids admission of
illegally obtained evidence
  The evidence obtained in violation of the search
and seizure clause, whether or not it is also self-
incriminating testimonial evidence, is
inadmissible
 The inadmissibility of the evidence does not
mean that it must be returned where it came
from. If the object evidence is not prohibited
object, it must be returned. But if it is
contraband, it can be confiscated.
CONSEQUENCE OF BREACH OF
FUNDAMENTAL RIGHTS BY THE PUBLIC
OFFICER
 The public officer or employee may be
held criminally accountable for the
felonies of violation of domicile, search
warrants maliciously obtained and abuse
in the service of those legally obtained,
searching domicile without two witnesses
albeit the search is proper, or unlawful
arrest
 The evidence secured as a
consequence of the breach of these
fundamental rights may be utilized to
pin the public officer for the offense of
illegal search and seizure
 Example: for ‘planting’ of evidence''
in drug cases for the imposition of
death penalty”
SUBSTANTIVE LAW – part of law which creates, defines,
and regulates rights
 Conceptions of law and fact are incomplete and
inadequate until supplemented and unified by law. Law
supplies to the rules of evidence much of their form
and all their objective. Not only do the substantive
law and that regulating judicial procedure deeply
affect the rules of evidence and the canons of its
administration, but evidence on the trial of any
issue is conditioned by its relevancy to the proof
of constituent facts and of these facts to the
existence of a right or liability, which, in turn, is
determined by law. It is, therefore, essential to
consider in what way law is to be regarded in this
connection.
 Republic Act No. 9165 – the Comprehensive Dangerous
Drugs Act of 2002, which took effect on July 4, 2002,
serves as the basic rule on the chain of custody involving
drug cases:
 A matter of substantive law, which cannot be
brushed aside as a simple technicality. Its
provisions were crafted to address potential
police abuses by narrowing the window of
opportunity for tampering with evidence
 The apprehending team having initial custody and
control of the dangerous drugs, controlled
precursors and essential chemicals,
instruments/paraphernalia and/ or laboratory
equipment shall, immediately after seizure and
confiscation, conduct a physical inventory of the
seized items and photograph the same in the
presence of the accused or the person/s from
whom such items were confiscated and/or seized,
or his/her representative or counsel, with an
elected public official and a representative of the
National Prosecution Service or the media who
shall be required to sign the copies of the
inventory and be given a copy thereof:
Provided, That the physical inventory and
photograph shall be conducted at the place where
the search warrant is served; or at the nearest
police station or at the nearest office of the
apprehending officer/ team, whichever is
practicable, in case of warrantless seizures:
Provided, finally, That noncompliance of these
requirements under justifiable grounds, as
long as the integrity and the evidentiary value
of the seized items are properly preserved by
 the apprehending officer/team, shall not render
void and invalid such seizures and custody
over said items

Any justification or explanation in cases of

noncompliance with the requirements of Section
21 (1) of RA No. 9165, as amended, shall be
clearly stated in the sworn
statements/affidavits of the apprehending/
seizing officers, as well as the steps taken to
preserve the integrity and evidentiary value of
the seized/confiscated items.

The Implementing Rules and Regulations on the

chain of custody thus require that the
apprehending officers not simply mention a
justifiable ground, but also clearly state this
ground in their sworn affidavit, coupled with a
statement on the steps they took to preserve
the integrity of the seized item.

 Republic Act No. 11055, the Philippine Identification

System Act approved on August 6, 2018 –

PROCEDURAL LAW = prescribes method of enforcing the

rights or obtaining the redress for their invasion
