HYPOTHETICALS AND

PRACTICAL EXERCISES

September 21, 2020

Prof. P.A.T. Prodigalidad
Evidence, BGC Evening (2020-2021)
 PRACTICAL
EXERCISES:
EASY ROUND
 FACTS

In a litigation before the RTC of Pasig City,

plaintiff seeks to prove that the Pasig River
connects Laguna de Bay with Manila Bay and
flows through several cities of Metro Manila
including Taguig, Taytay, Pasig, Makati,
Mandaluyong, San Juan and Manila.
 FACTS

The accused is on trial for reckless imprudence

resulting in homicide. In the Information, it is
alleged that the accused drove the wrong way
on the Elliptical Road, a well-travelled and
multi-lane one-way street around the Quezon
Memorial Circle, and thereupon struck a
messenger who was pedaling the proper
direction on his bicycle.
 PRACTICAL
EXERCISES:
INTERMEDIATE
ROUND
 FACTS

MisterClean Detergent Corporation sued a

competitor, Tidy Cleansers Corporation, for
false advertising. In its complaint for
injunction, MisterClean claims that Tidy’s
advertisements falsely represent that its
detergent is better for the environment than
brands sold by MisterClean.
HYPOTHETICAL
CASE NO. 1
 FACTS
In August 2020, Anthony was charged with robbery by
way of force and intimidation. In the Information, it was
alleged that Anthony, while wearing a clear face shield
with blue plastic sides and a blue reusable silicone mask
with a bright yellow Nike hoodie and jeans, entered the
premises of the K-TV Restaurant along Kalayaan Avenue
and, with use of a knife, intimidated the cashier and
forcibly took the cash in the register. With respect to the
robbery, the prosecution’s evidence consisted of the
following: (i) testimony of the cashier as to what the
robber was wearing – a clear face shield with blue plastic
sides, a blue reusable silicone mask, a bright yellow Nike
hoodie and jeans – and what he took (cash amounting to
over PhP 20,000.00);
 FACTS
and (ii) testimony of the policeman who attested, under
oath, that the cashier identified Anthony as the robber
and that, inside Anthony’s home, he found a Ph. clear
face shield with blue plastic sides, a blue reusable silicone
mask, a bright yellow Nike hoodie and jeans. Anthony, on
the other hand, argued that even one of the waiters of
the K-TV Restaurant had the same outfit and presented,
as proof, photos of the waiter wearing clear face shield
with blue plastic sides, a blue reusable silicone mask, a
bright yellow Nike hoodie and jeans.
 FACTS
Despite the eyewitness testimony, the court decided to
acquit Anthony because: (i) the judge noted several
similarities between the items of clothing found in
Anthony’s home and those worn by one of the waiters of
K-TV Restaurant and (ii) stated that “there are clearly lots
of blue reusable silicone masks and bright yellow Nike
hoodies out there,” and that “[o]ne can Google blue
reusable silicone masks and bright yellow hoodies and find
lots of different variants.” Indeed, per the judge’s
decision, he personally conducted a Google search as well
as a search on Lazada and Shopee and found so many
sellers of these blue reusable silicone masks and bright
yellow Nike Hoodies.
HYPOTHETICAL
CASE NO. 2
 FACTS
Plaintiffs brought a constitutional challenge to an
ordinance passed by Barangay Alabang that restricted the
sale of condoms and contraceptives to persons without
prescriptions. Per the ordinance, the Barangay officials
found that condoms and contraceptives lead to abortions.

The trial court took judicial notice that (i) condoms and
contraceptives do not cause abortions; and (ii) that
condoms and contraceptives are generally not sold without
such prescription in other parts of Muntinlupa City, Metro
Manila and, in fact, the Philippines.
HYPOTHETICAL
CASE NO. 3
 FACTS
Dustin Moreno is charged with a murder that took
place on March 17, 2020 at 7:30 p.m. Accused
testifies that he was at home watching “Ang
Probinsyano” on Channel 2 at the time of the
murder. To attack this alibi, the prosecutor wants
the trial judge to take judicial notice that “Ang
Probinsyano” was not showing on Channel 2 at
the time of the murder.
HYPOTHETICAL
CASE NO. 4
 FACTS
Same case as previous problem. In support of Dustin's alibi
defense, Dustin's lawyer tries to discredit the identification by
the prosecution's principal eyewitness. The defense lawyer's
cross-examination emphasizes that Dustin and the eyewitness
are of different ethnicities (Dustin is Filipino and the eyewitness
is Korean), and that the eyewitness feared being shot in the
same incident. Defense counsel then furnishes the judge with
the book “Eyewitness Identification” by Dr. Elizabeth Loftus,
who the prosecutor stipulates is an authority in the field of
eyewitness identification.

Based on the results of experiments described in the book and

the opinions of Dr. Loftus, defense counsel asks the judge to
take judicial notice that the accuracy of identifications
diminishes when people are of different ethnicities and the
person making the identification is scared and nervous.
HYPOTHETICAL
CASE NO. 5
 FACTS
In a criminal case for possession of marijuana against a
foreigner in transit from California to Thailand (who was
caught with a joint), the accused’s sole defense is that he
did not intend to possess an illicit substance but rather
he has been prescribed by medical doctors to use the
same for treatment of his cancer and that the same is
legal both in California and in Thailand. However, his
plane was diverted and had to land in Manila for a short
while. After arraignment but before trial, the House of
Representatives and the Senate approved the bill
legalizing medical marijuana and was to submit the same
to Philippine President Duterte for approval. The
President in past news reports had indicated that any
such bill would be approved by him.
 FACTS
The accused pleaded not guilty to the crime. In
the course of the presentation of his defense,
accused’s counsel wants the trial court to take
judicial notice of the following facts: (a) that
marijuana has medicinal uses including to
address pain of cancer patients; (b) that the
possession and use of marijuana are legal in
California and Thailand; and (c) that accused’s
flight was only diverted to Manila.
HYPOTHETICAL
CASE NO. 6
 FACTS
Mr. Lim, an eminent scholar based in Hong Kong, was scheduled
to speak at an event in Manila on 14 August 2019. He was given
a ticket on Cathay Pacific, which was to depart for Manila in the
morning of the 13th and return to Hong Kong on the 15th. The
organizers sold more than a thousand tickets at PHP 5000.00
each. Mr. Lim was unable to leave Hong Kong for his talk in the
Philippines. He asked to reschedule but the organizers instead
demanded for payment of damages due to breach of contract.
He refused to pay. He asserted that the Hong Kong airport was
closed by protesters, that he could not even reach the airport
because of the protest and that his flight was cancelled.
HYPOTHETICAL
CASE NO. 7
 FACTS
In a case for breach of the non-competition clause in an
employment contract, the employer, STX, pleaded in its
verified Complaint that its employee, Ms. Penafiel,
resigned from the company effective 7 May 2018. Despite
the prohibition against being employed with a competitor
for a period of 2 years from separation from STX, Ms.
Penafiel was discovered to have commenced her
employment at Transcend, a competitor of STX on 14
May 2020.

Ms. Penafiel files her Answer and prays for the dismissal
of the Complaint on the ground that it fails to state a
cause of action (because, based on STX’s judicial
admission there was no violation of the non-competition
clause).
 FACTS
STX then moves for leave to file an Amended Complaint.
In the Amended Complaint, STX pleads that Ms. Penafiel
resigned from the Company effective July 5, 2018 (not 7
May 2020). Attached to the Amended Complaint was a
resignation letter dated 15 June 2020 with a notation that
the same was approved effective 5 July 2018. The
resignation letter was attached to Ms. Penafiel’s verified
Answer. STX alleges, to explain the amendments, that
the reference to 7 May 2018 was a mere typo.

Ms. Penafiel opposes the motion for leave to file Amended

Complaint on the ground that STX has already judicially
admitted that she resigned effective 7 May 2018
HYPOTHETICALS AND
PRACTICAL EXERCISES

September 21, 2020

Prof. P.A.T. Prodigalidad
Evidence, BGC Evening (2020-2021)