Admissions – matters which already admitted in the answer should not be and

cannot be a subject of a request for admissions by the plaintiff upon the defendant
precisely because it is repetitive. It would only be circuitous and a waste of time if
matters admitted in the answer are again requested in your mode of discovery
procedure of request for admissions.
Another mode of discovery procedure which is production or inspection of
documents and things. It is a possibility that when a party is preparing for his or
her pleading, certain documents and certain things are in the possession of the
adverse party and it is human instinct that the natural action of an adverse party is
not to share evidence which would be adversarial to that party. Example, Ms.
Gapongli is the plaintiff and I am the defendant and in my preparation of my
answer some of the documents that I shall be using in my defense are in the
possession of Ms. Gapongli. That is why I pointed out a while ago that it is human
instinct that an adverse party will not share the documents that which would
implicate her in the case that she filed against me. In certain instances such as the
given situation, if the documents I need is in possession of Ms. Gapongli to
establish my defense and inspite of my extrajudicial request she did not accede to
my request in producing the documents, I can use the modes of discovery of
procedure by coursing it through the court, through a motion for production of
documents in the possession of Ms. Gapongli. These documents can be any
document provided that it is material, relevant to the fact in issue in a particular
case. The case filed against me is collection suit, and my defense is payment,
unfortunately the acknowledgement receipt as evidence is in the possession of Ms.
Gapongli, or my copy is no longer with me, the only hope for me to produce to
prove that I have paid is to request from Ms. Gapongli. If extrajudicially which is
not a sine qua non condition for me to avail of the mode of discovery procedure of
production of documents, Ms. Gapongli did not accede to my request, I can course
my request to the court through a motion for production of documents. Example, it
is a case of encroachment of the property of Ms. Gapongli filed against me. Just to
point out that I really encroached upon the property of Ms. Gapongli, a part of my
house or even my fence encroached upon a particular portion of the real property
owned by Ms. Gapongli and before the filing of the case, Ms. Gapongli requested
access to my property for purposes of surveying my properties so that the exact
meets and bounds of the encroachment shall be determined by Ms. Gapongli, yet I
did not accede to her request, then the mode of discovery procedure of inspection
of my property which falls within things in your mode of discovery procedure in
inspection of things may be availed of by Ms. Gapongli. There is no problem with
respect with Writ of Amparo. In your Writ of Amparo, in your rule, you have your
interim reliefs for PO and IO. (Production Order/ Inspection Order) If you
remember your rule in your Writ of Amparo, where you have the interim reliefs of
PO/ IO it is akin/ similar in concept to the mode of discovery procedure of
production and inspection of documents of things. That’s for your production or
inspection of documents and things.
Finally, the last mode of discovery procedure is physical and mental examination.
This type of mode of discovery procedure can only be availed of by any of the
parties to a case if the physical or the mental condition of a person is a material fact
in issue in a particular case. This is also applicable in your special proceedings.
Remember your favorite subject 2nd semester. Prior to the discussion of Writ of
Habeas Corpus, I have discussed in passing guardianship. In your guardianship, a
petition for guardianship, it is possible that a petitioner files a petition for
guardianship and the issuance consequently of letters of guardianship for the
reason that the subject in the petition for guardianship is not mentally capacitated
to take care of himself or herself and his or her wealth or estate. Therefore, it
because a very crucial issue in a petition for guardianship if the ground for filing a
petition for guardianship is the mental incapacity of the targeted ward that the
subject person in the petition for guardianship if he can no longer appreciate
matters that could protect his or her estate. In that situation, a petition can seek for
mental examination so that just to prove that the mental state of the subject person
in a petition for guardianship is such that would warrant the issuance of letters of
guardianship. In this type of mode of discovery procedure, if the requested party
undergoes either mental or physical examination precisely because a material fact
in issue is his or her mental or physical condition and that person requests a copy
of the report from the physician who conducted the physical examination or who
conducted the mental examination that would ipso facto unclothe the requested
party of his right not to be bound by that particular report. What do I mean by the
phrase not to be bound? Remember that there are particular matters that a person is
protected under your rules on evidence particularly your privilege, so called
physician client privilege communication rule or any matter which may be
considered as incompetent or excluded under your rules on competency for a
particular evidence to be admissible if the person who was subjected to physical or
mental examination, himself or herself requested from the physician a copy of that
particular report then whatever privileges he is protected under the rules on
evidence will no longer apply to him or her. In like manner, when that person who
has been examined requests a copy of that report from the requesting party
particularly the physician who conducted the physical or mental examination, the
requesting party may also request a similar physical or mental examination report
from that party who was requested to undergo physical or mental examination if
there is one. It is possible that the physical or mental examination report of one
physician is different from another physician. It is possible that there are biases in
the report, the physician will not put in line his license by telling lies in the report.
However, it is very possible that the physician who conducted the physical or
mental examination because it is requested by the requesting party would have a
different conclusion and findings from another physician. Diba sabi nga nila, even
among experts they differ in terms of perspective. This reports eventually may be
used in evidence just to prove the court that the mental or physical condition of any
of the party is not that is being submitted to be by the requesting party because
there is another report showing otherwise. Example, if the issue were the paternity
of a child, it is possible that the respondent-defendant in that paternity suit, based
from the examination conducted upon him shows that it is one of inclusion, and if
it were inclusion then would the probability of parentage which is a W symbolized
by W if you remember your rule in DNA Evidence, a 99.9% of probability of
parentage, then that would be not really conclusory. It would be a rebuttable
presumption that the respondent is the father of the child, however it is less than
99.9%, the presumption is even lower but what if the result shows that it is 99.9%
probability of parentage but it is the belief of the putative father that he is not the
one who sired the child, he can submit himself to another DNA examination just to
counter the result conducted by the expert hired by the requesting party. If
different, which evidence will be accepted by the court? Jan na papasok ung
Vallejo test. Which between the two test are more sufficient, more credible, more
believable based from Vallejo test. Vallejo test has been incorporated in your rule
in DNA Evidence, because your Vallejo ruling predated your 2007 DNA Evidence
rule, the manner in which the sample was collected, the reputation of the expert
who conducted the DNA evidence, all of those will be taken into consideration in
determining which between the two results are more credible. Those are your
modes of discovery procedure.
Remember that during the pre-trial, the court also asks the parties whether they
will avail the modes of discovery procedure. If they do, then before trial, those
modes of discovery procedure should have been availed of because that particular
mode of discovery procedure, the result of which will possibly be used as evidence
during the trial.

TRIAL
In reality it is the longest but if you look into the rules, it is a short rule but under
2019 amendments, there were added provisions as compared to the 1997 Rules.
Timeframe by which the court must comply for purposes of trial. The maximum
period to conduct trial is either 300 days that is 10 months or 180 days that is 6
months. It depends. 180 days or 6 months if there are no third party, fourth party
complaints. But if there are, the maximum period for trial under the rules is 10
months or 300 days. When we talk about 300 days or 180 days, when is the
reconning period? The reconning period is at the time of commencement of trial
not at the time of the filing of the case or complaint. It is at the time when the trial
commences and when do we say that the trial has commenced? When the plaintiff
started to present his or her evidence. Just a caution, it is anyway in the rules,
within 1 month after the termination of the pre-trial and that includes your court
annex mediation, I discussed your court annex mediation and Judicial Dispute
Resolution. BTW, your CAM is included in pretrial but your JDR, if one is
conducted must be included in the period to conduct trial, meaning either included
in the 300 days or 180 days. Courts are forewarned not to include the JDR if one is
conducted in your pretrial. The period for JDR must be included in the period for
trial. Going back, that 300 day period or 180 day period for trial must be reconned
from the commencement of the presentation of evidence of the plaintiff and the
plaintiff must commence the presentation of his evidence within 30 days from
termination of pretrial. If the pretrial was terminated September 30, 2020, it’s a
new case and the pretrial was conducted under the 2019 amendments. The
presentation of evidence by the plaintiff should have commenced by October 31,
2020. That is exactly one month after your pre-trial was terminated in the given
illustration. So how many days is given to the plaintiff to wrap up the presentation
of its evidence or for the presentation of his evidence in chief. The plaintiff is
given 90 days from commencement of his presentation of evidence to complete the
presentation of evidence. That is maximum, 90 days or 3 months. In the same way,
the defendant is given the same length of time to complete its presentation of
evidence reconned from the time that he commenced his evidence. In situation
where there is third party complaint, fourth party complaint, all of those must be
the presentation of evidence for all of those must be completed also within 90days
or 3months from commencement of your presentation of evidence for the third
party complaint, etc, fourth party complaint. After the presentation of the last party
to present his evidence, that case is submitted for decision. The general rule is that
your trial courts are given 90days from the time that the case is submitted for
decision to render a judgment in civil cases. That’s the General rule. There are
particular cases which must be resolved/ decided/ where the judgment must be
rendered shorter.
Let us now try to illustrate. So we are talking about the complaint and the filing of
answer after proper service of summons and then there is pretrial. This is within
1month. It could be earlier. And there would be trial, that is what I was telling you
a while ago. The trial has a maximum period, from the time that it started, it should
be terminated either 180 days/6months (if no third party complaint) or 300
days/10months (if there is third party complaint). From the end of the trial, let us
say everything (the days) has been maximized, the case will be submitted for
judgment, the General Rule is that the court is given 3months or 90 days to make
its judgment.
Let us now look into this, the trial itself.
So it will be the plaintiff who will present its evidence in chief, Maximum days to
present evidence is 90 days. P-E-I-C (Plaintiff’s evidence in chief) > 90 days. The
defendant will present evidence thereafter. D-E-I-C (Defendant’s evidence in
chief) > Same period is given to the defendant. 90 days. In between, what
happens? In between the time when the plaintiff has ended the presentation of his
evidence in chief and before the defendant presents its evidence in chief the
plaintiff must FOE his evidence. What is FOE? Formal offer of evidence. This
formal offer of evidence will only apply if the plaintiff has documentary and object
evidence because if the plaintiff has no documentary and/or object evidence there
is no need to formally offer a documentary and object evidence because there is no
such evidence. What if it were merely testimonial evidence? Would that mean that
the plaintiff has waived his right to FOE the testimonial evidence if he will not
FOE the testimonial evidence on the day he rested his case. NO! Your testimonial
evidence is offered before the witness testifies in court. But for your object and or
documentary evidence, that is offered after the complete presentation of the
evidence of the plaintiff. So if it were Ms. Cator, who is the plaintiff and she has
two witnesses in the person of Ms. Leonino and Ms. Gayumba, the testimonial
evidence is formally offered when Ms. Leonino takes the witness stand. In the
same way, for the testimony of Ms Gayumba it is formally offered when she takes
the witness stand. If it Ms. Leonino identified documentary and/or object evidence
in the same way, on the part of Ms. Gayumba, then that is the time that upon the
termination of the presentation of evidence of Ms. Cator, in our illustration, the
second witness for example, after taking the testimony of Ms. Gayumba, that is the
time that Ms. Cator, being the plaintiff, actually through her counsel will formally
offer the documentary/ object evidence. Prior to the 2019 amendments, the FOE of
documentary/ object evidence may be in writing if allowed by the court. Today in
the 2019 amendments, it must be orally offered and the opposition thereto must be
also oral and the ruling must be oral. Example, there are three documentary
evidence identified all in all by Ms. Leonino and Ms. Gayumba. After the
testimony of Ms. Gayumba, the lawyer of Ms. Cator, must formally offer those
three-documentary evidence in open court orally. That is what is required by the
rules. The opposition for each of those documentary evidence must be orally done.
And let us assume the judge is Mr. Callion, with the FOE and the opposition
thereto, Judge Callion must make a ruling for each and every documentary
evidence also orally in open court not in chambers. It must be in open court. That
is what is required by your rules. Now, In making a ruling on the FOE, Judge
Callion shall not pass upon the weight and sufficiency of the documentary/ object
evidence. He will merely look into whether the object/ documentary evidence is
admissible. Admissibility as I said is different from weight and sufficiency. Once
Mr. Callion as the judge have made the ruling in open court not more than one
month from the FOE, the defendant must commence the presentation of his
evidence. So if the ruling of judge Callion transpired June 30, 2022, the latest that
the defendant must present his or her evidence must be July 31, 2022. It should not
be beyond July 1, it could be earlier. Remember one of the things that is being
discussed during pretrial is the trial dates, that is why when the judge gives the trial
dates for the plaintiff and the defendant. This period must be taken into
consideration. Example, the pretrial transpired June 30, 2021. Judge Callion must
be mindful that the presentation of evidence of Ms. Cator must begin not later than
July 31, 2021. And the trial dates for Ms. Cator must be the 90 day period for Ms.
Cator to finish the presentation of her evidence by the end of October. Judge
Callion in giving the trial dates must be mindful of that time frame. In the same
way, Judge Callion must be mindful that from the time that Ms. Cator will end her
presentation of evidence, the defendant is only given one month from termination
of presentation of evidence of Ms. Cator to begin the presentation of evidence of
the defendant. So the trial date of the defendant should not go beyond December 1.
If my computation is correct. You should be mindful of that if you were the judge.
2nd period
In our example, Ms. Cator is the plaintiff, for every trial date given to her, she
failed to present her evidence for whatever reason on the last day that she was
suppose to present her evidence, she failed. As I told you, there was no single
evidence presented by Ms. Cator. As the defendant, what would be your remedy so
that the case will be dismissed and therefore decided in your favor? Then you go to
rule 17, dismissals due to the fault of the plaintiff. Remember that one of the
dismissals due to the fault of the plaintiff is when the plaintiff failed to present his
evidence in chief. Within the time accorded to him. What if in our illustration
plaintiff presented the battery of her evidence completed it, but upon assessment of
the defendant, there is insufficiency of evidence to prove the case of Ms. Cator or
not even sufficiency, but plaintiff really failed to prove her cause of action or there
is no cause of action proven. No cause of action or want of cause of action or total
want or absence of cause of action, If that were the situation and the defendant
wants to end the case because either Ms. Cator failed to prove her case with
sufficiency of evidence or she has no cause of action, defendant may demur.
Demurrer to evidence can only come in after the plaintiff has completed
presentation of his evidence and when I talk about, or when your rules talk about
completed the presentation of evidence, the plaintiff has rested his case. And when
do we know that the plaintiff has rested his case? We know that the plaintiff has
rested his case when he has formally offered his object and documentary evidence
and there is ruling on that by the court. Without yet the ruling, it is premature to
demur. Your rule in demurrer to evidence, to day it is very clear in the 2019
amendments, is governed by the rule of motion which is rule 15. Your demurrer is
actually a motion to dismiss on what ground? On two grounds that Ive mentioned a
while ago, either insufficiency of evidence or no cause of action or lack of cause of
action or absence of cause of action. Since it is a motion to dismiss, after
presentation of evidence by the plaintiff, it is a litigious motion. Being a litigious
motion, upon receipt of the demurrer to evidence, the plaintiff is given 5 days
because its govern by your rules on motions to file his or her opposition. Upon the
lapse of the 5 day period to file an opposition, even without the opposition, within
15 days, the court must issue a resolution on the demurrer to evidence. The
demurrer can be granted or can be denied. Let us look into the implications if
granted, is there something left to be done? Once a demurrer is granted, it finally
terminates the proceedings in the case. Therefore, it is a final resolution, it is a final
order and the remedy is an appeal if the plaintiff wants to appeal it.
Or if the plaintiff wants to avail muna an MR(motion for reconsideration), he can
avail of a MR. But remember for your appeals, MR is not sine qua non (not a
condiction precedent). What happens if on appeal, the appellate court reverses the
dismissal because we are talking about grant of demurrer, and if granted, case is
dismissed either because of insufficiency of evidence or no cause of action at all. If
on appeal the appellate court reverses the resolution granting the demurrer and
consequently dismissing the case, then the case will be returned to the court a quo.
Will the defendant be allowed to present evidence in that situation? NO MORE! If
the appellate court reverses the grant of demurrer and consequently the dismissal
of the complaint, and that particular reversal has become final and executory then
will it be forwarded, will the records be forwarded to the appellate court? It will be
forwarded to the appellate court. It will be transmitted back to the appellate court.
The defendant will no longer present evidence. The case is therefore submitted for
resolution or final adjudication for that matter. Let us look into the situation
whereby the demurrer is denied. If the demurrer is denied, then would that mean
that the defendant has waived his right to present evidence? NO! if the demurrer is
denied then the defendant must present his evidence. That is for your demurrer to
evidence.
The rule in demurrer to evidence in criminal cases is different because it is either
with leave of court or without leave of court, your demurrer in criminal cases is
also orally done whether with leave or without leave of court pursuant to the 2017
revised guidelines for continuous trial in criminal cases. Unlike in civil cases,
governed by rule of motions therefore, it must be in writing but in criminal case, no
longer should it be in writing, it must be oral but the demurrer itself should be in
writing. The motion oral in criminal cases but the demurrer is in writing. In civil
cases, your demurrer must follow the rules on motions, it must therefore be in
writing; in criminal cases, after the prosecution has rested its case, the demurrer is
orally made. If granted, the motion to demur is orally made, but the demurrer in
itself must be in writing.
I want to be more specific in your trial, if the plaintiff has 4 witnesses. W1, W2,
W3, W4, all of these witnesses must be presented, and their respective testimonies
must be terminated within 90 days from commencement of presentation of
evidence by the plaintiff. In the same way for the defendant if the defendant has 5
witnesses, W1, W2, W3, W4, W5 all of these witnesses must be presented, and
their respective testimonies must be terminated within 90 days from
commencement of presentation of evidence by the defendant. Under your rule on
trial, there must be strict compliance with your one-day examination of witness
rule. What is this one-day examination of witness rule? It means that the direct
examination, the cross examination, the redirect if there is, the recross if there is,
must be done within one setting, one hearing date. That is for your presentation of
evidence for the plaintiff and the defendant.
Chronology of the presentation of evidence for the plaintiff and the defendant.
Who will present evidence first? It is the plaintiff; he will present evidence proving
his claims and causes or cause of action. After that the defendant will present
evidence which would point out his defenses if he has a counter claim, then the
counter claim whether permissive, compulsory or both and if there is more than
one defendant and that defendant has a cross claim against another defendant then
the cross claim. What about the third party defendant, if there is 3 rd party complaint
then the third party defendant will also present his defenses if there is more than
one third party defendant and he has cross claims against his third party defendant,
his cross claims and if he has counter claims, either against the defendant or the
plaintiff he can also present his counter claims against those individuals, same with
fourth party complaint. If there are counter claims and cross claims, then the
person against whom the counter claims and cross claims are directed against, will
thereafter present evidence here. After the presentation of the third party
complaint. If there is a need to present rebuttal evidence, then it will be presented
after the person against whom the cross claim, the counter claim has been
presented. He has presented his evidence, that is the time the rebuttal will come in.
If there is a need to present rebuttal evidence. Usually it ends here (Plaintiff and
Defendant) If it ends there, who will present the last evidence? The last evidence
would be the person against whom a counter claim or a cross claim is directed
against. So the plaintiff will present evidence after the defendant has presented
evidence if there is a counter claim and another defendant will present evidence if
there is a cross claim filed against him by a co defendant. That is the chronology of
presenting evidence. At anytime, there can be postponements due to the illness of
either the counsel or the party. Postponements due to illness of the counsel or the
party is excusable provided that proof on that is submitted to the court. What is the
proof required under the rules? Its either an affidavit or a sworn certification. But
even if absence during the presentation of evidence by the party, or the counsel is
excusable as evidence by a sworn certification or an affidavit that party must still
complete the presentation of his evidence within the period provided for under the
rules by your court.
That would be for trial. There are important concepts in relation to trial such as
calendar of cases. When we talk about calendar, we have to consider that in the
calendar of cases, the court must take into consideration the periods that we have
discussed for your trial and at the same time, there are particular cases which must
be prioritized even if they have been filed much later as compared to earlier filed
cases. The rule is, cases filed earlier must be prioritized in the calendar of cases of
the court. The exception is even if some cases are filed much later if these cases
require immediate action from the court, time is of the essence and therefore they
must be calendared immediately, for example, election cases must be prioritized or
cases where provisional remedies are included such as TRO or preliminary
injunction or preliminary attachment. Example, there is a demolition order issued
by the LGU of Baguio in the exercise of the power of the mayor to issue
demolition orders, it is against the structure owned by Ms. Mislang in Baguio. She
filed a case against the city of Baguio for injunction for the prayer for preliminary
injunction and TRO and the structure of Ms. Mislang, which is an illegal structure,
will be demolished tomorrow. And the case for injunction with preliminary
injunction and TRO is filed today by Ms. Mislang. You see if the court will still
wait for tomorrow, then the case will become moot and academic with respect to
the TRO and PI(preliminary injunction) without TRO and PI, the demolition order
will be implemented and the structure will be demolished that is why when the
particular case with the prayer for provisional remedy is filed, the court must
prioritize that case. In that example, if Ms. Mislang prayed for a 72hr TRO, it must
be categorically stated there that you are praying for 72 hr TRO, because if you are
not praying for 72 hr TRO, then the executive judge will not issue a 72 hr TRO.
Anyway if you prayed for a 72hr TRO and the demolition order will be
implemented tomorrow, and there is really immediacy and urgency to issue that
particular 72hr TRO because the demolition order will be implemented tomorrow,
the executive judge will issue a 72hr TRO. So, don’t forget that.
Cases which require immediate and urgent action from the court must also be
prioritized. That would include also your special civil actions. For you election
cases, they must be prioritized, baka naman huhuliin mo if you are working with
the court, election cases, tapos na ung term nung official dun sa election protest,
pagkatapos talagang panalo pala siya, the reason why the election protest was filed
is defeated. Why? Nanalo nga siya di naman niya naserve ung kanyang term
because hindi binigyan ng proper and immediate and urgent action ng court. So
look into the cases where the court must urgently act upon it even if it was filed
much later. That includes also the Habeas Corpus cases or Amparo cases and
Habeas Data cases. And even environmental cases, governed by Rules of
procedure for environmental cases. They must be prioritized.
That’s for your calendar of cases. It’s the clerk of court who manages the court
calendar for our information but even if the clerk of court manages the calendar of
the court, it is still under the direct control and supervision of the judge. So, I
encourage not to postpone your hearings unless really justified because you will be
harassed in presenting your evidence within the time frame provided for the
presentation of your evidence if you keep on postponing your presentation of
evidence. Worst, it can be ground for dismissal under rule 17. Dismissals due to
the fault of plaintiff. That is for your calendar.
Another important concept in relation to your trial is your computation of time. So.
Your rule in computation of time is what we have learned in civil law. Exclude the
first day, include the last day. For example, in our exams, regarding prescription in
katarungan pambarangay law, marami nag kamali sa computation, diba the
ejectment case was filed October 1, 2020, which is 5 days before the case for
ejectment prescribes. This was filed with the barangay. It tolls the running of the
prescriptive period for a maximum period of 60 days and the complaint was filed
when? Regardless if it is January 4 or 5.
October 1, 2020 + 30 = oct 31. +30 = nov 30. Therefore the prescriptive period
recommenced to run December 1, 2020. Since there is 5 days, then you have until
December 6 to file the complaint for ejectment. Therefore, by December 7, the
action has prescribed. That is how we compute by excluding the first day and
including the last day. The last day here to file the complaint is December 6. The
action prescribed on December 7, the last day was December 6. When the
complaint was filed January 20, 2021, the action has already prescribed.
Example. Ms. Palma is the lawyer for the defendant Ms. Llamas. The last day to
file the answer because Ms. Llamas hired the legal service of Atty. Palma, the last
day to file the answer fell on October 31, 2022. Naissue na ni PBBM ung executive
order declaring Oct. 31 as special non-working holiday. So her last day to file was
Oct. 31. Ms. Palma filed a motion for extension or motion for time to file an
answer Nov. 2, 2022 seeking an additional 30 days from November 2, 2022 to file
an answer. That is allowed, ung first motion for extension to file an answer in your
rules in 2019 rules or until +30. Until December 2, 2022 to file an answer.
Reasoning that although the last day was October 31, considering that October 31
is a holiday and November 1 is also a honiday, so she has until November 2 to file
the motion for extension. As the judge, will you grant the motion for extension?
Do not grant the motion for extension. The last day to file the answer in our
example is October 31. When one moves for a motion for extension, the request
for extension must be filed before or on the last day of the filing of the request for
extension. Not after. The period to file the required answer in our given example
has already elapsed. Common mistake, hindi lapsed, ELAPSED. The period has
ELAPSED. Not lapsed. You should know when to use lapsed from Elapsed.
Therefore, there is nothing more to request for an extension if the period to file the
answer has already ended. If the last day falls on a holiday or a Saturday or a
Sunday, ensure that you file it before that last day which is the holiday or a
Saturday or a Sunday. That is for computation of time and calendar.
Another important concept in relation to trial is subpoena, there are two types of
subpoena, you have your subpoena, a plain subpoena which is actually ad
testificandum and subpoena duces tecum. If you see there duces tecum, the person
who is the subject of the subpoena duces tecum must bring to court either an object
evidence or a documentary evidence. In our example, I am using Mr. Paderes since
he is working with PDEA, it could be a dangerous drug or it could be document in
relation to a dangerous drugs such as a chemical analysis, forensic chemist report.
It could be initial report or final report, the confirmatory report. If one testify on a
document or object evidence, it is a subpoena duces tecum e testificandum because
he will testify on that object/ documentary evidence. Take note, that failure to heed
the subpoena will justify the court if the reason for non-compliance is inexcusable,
will justify the court to cite the person subject of the subpoena for contempt.
Worst, the court can exercise its power to issue compulsory processes such as a
warrant of arrest. If Ms. Llamas has been named as a witness, she executed a JA on
the day that she was supposed to be presented as a witness, she failed to appear
without justifiable reason and the court has been liberal giving Ms. Llamas the
opportunity to appear one last time on a different date, and she does not appear
without justifiable reason, She may be arrested and incarcerated until she
completes her testimony in court. If does not want to be incarcerated (she does not
want to go to prison) She can post bail to secure the presence when the court shall
need her presence for the taking of her testimony. Rarely do our courts use this
power. There are grounds to quash a subpoena, if the subpoena is oppressive, or
used to harass a person, the particular subpoena can be quashed through a motion
to quash a subpoena. Or when the kilometrage or milage of the person subject of
the subpoena is not paid. You have a kilometrage fee or milage fee. Which is
equivalent to the reasonable expenses to transport the witness, reasonable meaning
the ordinary rate, if the ordinary rate of Jeep 12 pesos minimum or 13 pesos soon,
then that is vice versa that is 26 pesos but there are rates to be followed.