Evidence Notes
 BBE Bar Qs
o Answer: Yes. Rule 128, Section 3. –
relevant to the fact in issue and is not
excluded by the law or the Rules of
Court.
o Printout of a photograph – admissibility
of the new documentary evidence.
o Relevancy – The photo has such a
relation to the issue of whether the
restaurnt served unsanitary food as to
induce belief that it is liable for damages
for such act.
o Competency, printout cannot be
objected to based on the ODR. “Orig” of
a photo includes the negative or any
print therefrom. If such photo is stored
in a computse or similar device, like a
CP, any printout or other output
readable by sight or other means,
shown to reflect the data accurately, is
an original.
 The lawyer did not breach attorney-client
privilege.
o Consulted in his professional capacity.
Original Document Rule
 Subject of inquiry is the contents of a document,
no evid is admissible other than the orig
documental itlsef
o XPN:
 Lost, destroyed, w/o BF on the
part of the offeror;
 Orig is in the custody of the
party against whom the
evidence is offered and the
latter fails to prodcue it after
reasonable notice, or the orig
cannot be obtained by local
judicial orces or procedures
 Consists of numerous account
which cannot be examined in
court without great loss of time
 When the orig is a public record
in the custody of a public officer
 When the orig is NOT closely
related to a controlling issue
 The rule applies only when the purpose is to
establish the terms of a writing.
o You want to prove in court a certain fact
that can be cult form the contents of a
document
o When the evid introduced concerns
some external fact about a writing like its
existence, execution or delivery without
reference to its terms, the rule cannot be
invoked
 In other words, ODR is not
applicable in an object evidence
 ODR can be waived if not raised in the trial or for
failure of the other party to object
 Failure to object -> secondary becomes primary
evidence
 Admissibility =/= believability
 When should a party object?
o ODR – objection to offer must be made
orally immediately after the offer is made
o Objection to the testimony of a witness
for LACK of formal offer must be made
as soon as the witness begins to testify.
Objectiuon to a question proprounded in
the course of the oral examination of a
witness must be made as soon as the
grounds therefor become reasonably
apparent.
o The grounds for the objection must be
specified
o Documentary –
 Offer of evidence must be made
orally
 Offer of testimony of a witness
in evidence must be made at
the time he witness is called to
testify
 DOCU and OBJECT EVID
 Offer of such SHALL BA
MADE AFTER the
presentation of a party’s
testimonial evidence
 AFTER the formal offer,
that is the proper time to
object its admissibility
 Formal offer of evid –
conveyst to the judge
the purpose for which
evidence is being
presented. It informs the
court and the opponent
of the reason why the
proponent is presenting
such evidence in the
first place.
NOTE!!
1. The court shall conisder no evid that has not
been formally offered; and
2. Objection to offer of evid is DONE AFTER THE
OFFER IS MADE
a. So, any objection to evid on the ground
that it violates the ODR during trial
(meeaning, naa pa gatestify nga
witness) would exactly be premature
Illustration:
 IDENTIFICATION pa during trial – unya ang
docu kay photocopy lang so violation of ODR
o If defedenant objected prematurely, he
gives P the opportunity to correct his
mistake because technically speaking,
othe photopcopy of the PN has not been
officially submitted to the court yet for its
conisderaion. No formal offer yet.
  OBJECT na after formal offer  Non-prodcution –
 Offer of docu and object evid shall be made only advserse party failed to
after the presentaiton of a party’s testimonial produce orig despite
evidence. reasonable notice or
cannot be obtained by
Sps. Tapayan v. Martinez: ODR requires that the orig local judicial processes
docu be produced whenever its contents are the subject (relate: subpoena)
of inquiry except in certain limited cases.  If this applies, the
documents may be
IF ORIGINAL IS UNAVAILABLE proved as follows: (1)
 What should be done if the orig cannot be by a copy; (2) recital of
presented? contents; (3)
o Proponent must have a legal justification TESTIMONY OF
for his failure or inability to present the WITNESSES [in the
orig and then present secondary order stated].
evidence  Orig consist of numerous
o Legal justification: accounts
 Loss, destruction and  Secondary may be
unavailability presented if:
o Secondary evid – admissible when the o Orig consist of
orig were actually lost or destroyed. numerous
Prior to such, proponent must establish accounts/other
the former existence of the document. documents
 Prove existence;  Docus cannot be
 Execution; examined without great
 Loss; loss of time
 Contents (process of  Fact sought to be
laying the basis – establshed is only t he
process of introducing gheneral result of the
second evid in liue of whole (just give judge a
orig) summary)
o Lahji ang laying the predicate. –  Oig Is NOT closely related to a
p[rocedure if you want to impeach the controlling issue – meaning
witness because of inconsistency. collateral issue ra.
o Production of secondary evid requires  Not the main point is
compliance: only to substantiate the
teistmony of the witness
 Offerer must prove the
execution or existnce
PAROL EVID RULE
 Show the cause of
 Bale ang PER kay mao na siya ang RULE NGA
unaibiliyt
DI KA PWEDE MAG PRESENT OG PAROL
 Unavai is without bad
EVIDENCE
faith
 When the terms of an agreement have been
o Lay the basis:
reduced to writing, it is considered as containing
 Account for all duplicate all the terms agreed upon and there can be, as
originals or counterparts between the parties and their successors in
of the origin interest, no evidence of such terms other than
 Orig is in the custody or control the contents of the written agreement
of the adverse party – does not
 RULE OF EXCLUSION/EXTRINSIC
ipso fact aiuthorize the intro of
EVIDENCE/EVIDENCE ALIUNDE
secondary evidence to prove
 You are not allowed to present parol evidence or
contents. Party who seeks to
extrinsic evidence when supposedly everything
present secondary evidence
that htep arties agreed upon are already written
must lay the basis foundation for
in the contract.
its introduciton:
 By way of effect of the PER – if it is NOT in the
 Existence
contract, it is INADMISSIBLE. The stipulations
 Custody of adverse
may be valid between the parties but you cannot
party
prover it in court.
 Reasonable notice to
 Raitonale:
prodce the orig
o Hierary of evidence
document
 o Comparative accuracy of written
evidence over everything else that rest
merely on the fleeting memory of man.
o Princple of waiver after integration
 Everything not integrated in the
contract are deemed waived
o The belief that parol evidence is prone
to fabrication. – to give stability to written
agreements and to remove the
temptation and possibilty of perjury
Requisites of PER
 Agreement; [agreement = contract]
 Terms of agreement must in writing;
o Need not be in a public
instrument/document or need not be in
any particular form or be signed by
BOTH parties
 Dispute is between the parties or their
successors in interest; and
o A stranger cannot be bound to the PER
o If one of the parties tot hecase is a
compelte stranger, he is not bound by
the rule and can introfuce extrinsic
evidence against the effeicacy of the
writing
 Dispute as to the terms of agreement
o Dispute refers to maters extraneous to
the agreement – PER does not apply
EXCEPTIONS TO THE PER – meaning pag naan ing
exceptions, PWEDE KA MAG PRESENT OG PAROL
EVIDNCE OR EVIDENCE ALIUNDE OR EXTRINSIC
EVIDENCE
 May present evid to modify, explain, or add to
the terms of the written agreement if heshe puts
in issue in a verified pleading:
o Intrinsic ambiguity, mistake, or
imperfection in the written agreement;
 Mistake – mistake of fact mutual
to the parties
 Imperfection – incomplete and
does not express the whole
agreement of the parties.
o Failure of the written agreement to
express the true intentandn agreement
of the parties thereto;
o Validity of the written agreement;
 To prove that the contract is
NOT valid
o Existence of other terms agreed to by
the parties or their successors aftert he
execution of agreement
 AKA subsequent agreements
 Only agreed upon it later on.
 In order that PE may e admitted, these
exceptions must be put in issue by the pleading,
such that if not raised in the complaint or in the
asnwer, a party cannot later on be permitted to
introduce parol evidence thereon.
o Defendant – affirmative defense
SUMMARY [coverage of the PER]
 Covered: only prior and contemporaneous
agreements which are deemed to have been
merged in the writing conformably to the
integration of the agreement rule.
 Not covered: subsequent agreements despite
the fact that such agreement may have the
effect of addting or abrogating the contract of the
parties as evidenced by the writing
 Also not covered: Collateral agreements – which
although oral and contemporaenous with the
writing, are separate and distinct agreement
(Side agreements – contemporaenous oral
agreements)
 Not covered: ALL OTHER AGREEMENT,
whether pior or contemporaneous, subsequent
or collateral, if the isue revolves around fraud
and false representation since they are
incidental to the execution and not the
integration
 All other agreement, when third parties, who are
not privy thereto, are involved.
Abella v. Abella: Two (2) things must be established for
parol evid to be amitted:
1. Existence of any of the four exceptions has been
put in issue in a party’s pleading or has not been
objected to by the adverse party; and
2. The PE sought to be presented serves to form
the basis of the conclusion proposed by the
presenting party.
Note: PER applicable only in judicial proceedings and
not in administrative proceedings.
PER – presupposes that orig is available in court
ODR -orig is not avaialble or there is dispute as to
whether said writing is original
PER – prohibits the varying of the terms of a written
agreement
ODR – prohibits the introduciton of secondary evidence
regardless of whteher or not it varies the contents of the
orig
PER – nakabutang ban as agreement? Kung wala,
violation of PER
ODR – orig ba na or photoco0py lang??? Kung
photocopy lang, violation of ODR
PER – applies only to documents which are contratual in
nature except wills
ODR – applies to all kinds of writings
PER - can be invoked only when the controversy is bet.
The parties to the written agreement and their privies
ODR – can be invoked by any party to an action whether
he has participated or not in the writing.
When will you object on the ground of violation of
PER?
Note: you are not objecting to the DOCUMENT in PER.
You are objecting to the testimony of a person, a
witness, who says something that CANNOT be found in
the document. You are actually objecting the testimony
that tends to change, modify, or add to the terms of the
written agreement.

Objectionable evidence can be:

1. Written or in the form of another document;
a. Objection must be interposed AFTER
FORMAL OFFER
2. Testimonial
a. If the objectionable testimony is in the
course of examination:
i. Objection should be interposed
as soon as the grounds therefor
shall become reaosnably
apparent
b. If the objectionable nature of the
testimony is apparent form the offer prior
to the testimony:
i. Before a witness testifies, the
counsel has to formal offer first
to the court what the testimony
of the witness is befopre the
witness can p[roceed to testify –
UPON OFFER AND BEFORE
WITNESS, objection to
evidence offered orally must be
made immediately after the offer
is made.

Note: Object only after offer BUT it depends on what

kind of evidence being presented.

PER – timing of objection based on the PER depdnds on

the form taken by evidence aliunde.
ODR – proper time to object is always after the
presentation of a party’s testimonial evidence which is
after formal offer of documentary evidence.

If objection is sustained, you can move to strike on the

gorund that it violates the ODR.

PER – its purpose is to make sure that the final

understandinf of the parties , deliberately expressed in
wirintf shall NOT be changed. It applies to wills.

STATUTE OF FRAUDS – to prevent perjured testimony

in proof of certain contracts and trhe statute applies only
to those enumerated types. Does not apply to wills.

PER – rule of integration which applies where there is

written agreement. It bars evidence of terms that exist
outside the agreement
SOF – rule of enforceability which applies in the absence
of an agreement in writing. Bars proof of an agreement
altogether.