RULES OF EVIDENCE

 RULES OF COURT
Rule 132 Secs. 27-40
Section 27.
Public record of a private document. 
An authorized public record of a private
document may be proved by the original record, or
by a copy thereof, attested by the legal custodian of
the record, with an appropriate certificate that such
officer has the custody.
Section 27.
• Public record of private document
may be proved:
By the original public record of private document
By a certified copy thereof attested by the legal
custodian who has the custody of the original
record
Section 28.
Proof of lack of record. 
A written statement signed by an officer
having the custody of an official record or by his
deputy that after diligent search no record or entry
of a specified tenor is found to exist in the records
of his office, accompanied by a certificate as above
provided, is admissible as evidence that the records
of his office contain no such record or entry
Section 28.
The certification of lack of record must show that:
That the officer or his deputy has the custody of
official records in his office
Such officer or deputy conducted a diligent search of
a record or entry of a specified tenor
After diligent search, the records of his office do not
contain such record or entry of a specified tenor or
no such record or entry is found to exist.
Section 29.
How judicial record impeached. 
Any judicial record may be impeached by
evidence of: (a) want of jurisdiction in the
court or judicial officer, (b) collusion between
the parties, or (c) fraud in the party offering
the record, in respect to the proceedings
Section 29.
Judicial record may be impeached by evidence of:
 Lack of jurisidiction of the court or the judicial officer
 Collusion between parties or
 Fraud in the party offering the record regarding the
judicial proceeding
Section 30.
Proof of notarial documents. 
Every instrument duly acknowledged or
proved and certified as provided by law, may be
presented in evidence without further proof, the
certificate of acknowledgment being prima
facie evidence of the execution of the instrument
or document involved.
Section 30.
• The certificate of acknowledgment in the
notarized document constitutes prima facie
evidence of the execution thereof.
- (CITIBANK vs Sabeniano 504 SCRA378)
Section 30.
• A public document duly acknowledged before
a notary public, under his hand andseal with
his certicicate therto attacked, is admissible in
evidence without, further proof of its due
execution and delivery until some question is
raised as to the verity of said acknowledged
and certificate
(Antillon vs Barcellon 37 SCRA phil 148)
 Section 30.
• A Notarial Document is evidence the facts in
clear unequivocal manner therein expressed. It
has in its favor the presumption of regularity. To
contradict all these there must be evidence that is
clear, convincing an more than merely
preponderant.
(Cabrera vs Villanueva 160 SCRA 672)
Section 30.
• Notarization of a private document converts a
document into a public one, and renders it
admissible in court without further proof of its
authenticity
- (Joson vs Baltazar, 194 SCRA 59)
Section 31.
• Alteration in document, how to explain. 
The party producing a document as genuine which has
been altered and appears to have been altered after its
execution, in a part material to the question in dispute, must
account for the alteration. He may show that the alteration was
made by another, without his concurrence, or was made with
the consent of the parties affected by it, or was otherwise
properly or innocent made, or that the alteration did not
change the meaning or language of the instrument. If he fails
to do that, the document shall not be admissible in evidence.
Section 31.
To be admissible in evidence, the alteration in
the document must be shown:
That the alteration was made by another person
without the concurrence of the party objecting to it
That the alteration was made with the consent of
the parties affected by it
That the alteration was properly or innocently
made or
That the alteration did not change the meaning or
language of the document
Section 32.
Seal
There shall be NO difference between sealed
and unsealed private documents insofar as
their admissibility as evidence is concerned.
Section 33.
• Documentary evidence in an unofficial
language. 
Documents written in an unofficial
language shall not be admitted as evidence,
unless accompanied with a translation into
English or Filipino. To avoid interruption of
proceedings, parties or their attorneys are
directed to have such translation prepared
before trial.
Section 33.
• The official languages of the Philippines are
Filipino and English.
– (section 7, Art XIV, The Philippine Constitution)
• Thus, written documents to be admissible in
evidences must be in Filipino or English
Language or translated in Filipino or English.
Section 33.
• An Instrument, document or paper which is
required by law to be stamped and which has
been signed, issued, accepted, or transferred
without being duly stamped shall not be
admissible or used in evidence in any court
until the requisite stamp or stamps shall have
been affixed thereto and cancelled.
Section 33.
• A party who is among those obliged to pay the
documentary stamp taxes is stopped from
claiming that the documents are inadmissible
in evidence for non-payment thereof.
(Filipinas Textile Mills vs CA 415 SCRA 635)
C. OFFER AND OBJECTION
Section 34.
• Offer of evidence. 
The court shall consider no evidence which
has not been formally offered. The purpose for
which the evidence is offered must be
specified.
Section 35.
When to make offer. 
As regards the testimony of a witness, the
offer must be made at the time the witness is
called to testify.
Documentary and object evidence shall be
offered after the presentation of a party's
testimonial evidence. Such offer shall be done
orally unless allowed by the court to be done in
writing.
Section 35.
• Amended: All evidence must be offered orally.
• The offer of the testimony of a witness in
evidence must be made at the time the witness is
called to testify.
• The offer of documentary and object evidence
shall be made after the presentation of a party’s
testimonial evidence.
Section 35.
• The amendment in Sec. 35, for one, requires all
evidence to be offered ORALLY.
• Also, the amendment gives emphasis on when
testimonial evidence should be offered, which
is at the time the witness is called to testify.
• As to documentary or object evidence, the offer
should be made after presentation of a party’s
testimonial evidence.
Section 35.
• The formal offer of testimonial evidence is
necessary in order to enable the court to rule
intelligently on any objections to the questions
asked.
- (People vs Ancheta 431 SCRA 42)
Section 35.
• The offer of testimonial evidence is effected b
calling the witness to the stand and letting him
testify before the court upon appropriate
questions.
- (Guerrero vs St Clares Realty Co 124 SCRA 553)
Section 35.
• It is basic in the law of evidence that the court
shall consider evidence solely for the purpose
for which it was offered.
- (Ragudo vs Fabella Estated Tenants Association Inc
466 SCRA 136)
Section 35.
• The purpose for which evidence is offered
must be specified because such evidence may
be inadmissible for several purposes under the
doctrine of multiple admissibility or may be
admissible for one purpose and not for
another, otherwise the adverse party cannot
interpose the proper objection.
Section 35.
• Evidence submitted for one purpose may not
be considered for any other purpose.
- (Uniwide sales realty and resources corp. vs Titan-
Ikeda Const and Dev Corp 511 SCRA 335)
Section 35.
• As a general rule, when a Witness takes
the stand, the law on ground of public
policy, presumes that he is competent.
The burden is upon the party objecting to
the competency of a witness to establish
the ground of INCOMPETENCY
- (People vs Pruna 390 SCRA 577)
Section 35.
• The court shall consider NO evidence which
has not been formally offered.
- (Alcaraz v Racimo 125 SRA 328)
Section 35.
• Identification of a documentary evidence must
be distinguished from the formal offer as an
exhibit. The first is done in the course of the
trial and is accompanied by the marking s of
the evidence as an exhibit. The second is done
only when the party rests its case and not
before.
- (People v Santito 201 SCRA 87)
Section 35.
• Documents which may have been identified
and mark as exhibits during pre trial or trial
but which were not formally offered in
evidence CANNOT in any manner be treated
as evidence.
- (Heirs of Pedro Pasag v. Parocha, 522 SCRA 410)
Section 35.
• A document or any article for that matter is not
evidence when it is simply marked for
Identification; it must be FORMALLY offered.
- (Candido v CA 253 SCRA 78)
Section 36.
• Objection. 
– Objection to evidence offered orally must be made
immediately after the offer is made. Objection to a
question propounded in the course of the oral
examination of a witness shall be made as soon as
the grounds therefore shall become reasonably
apparent.
Section 36.
• Objection. 
• An offer of evidence in writing shall be
objected to within three (3) days after notice
of the unless a different period is allowed by
the court.
• In any case, the grounds for the objections
must be specified.
Section 36.
• Amended: Objection to offer of evidence must
be made orally immediately after the offer is
made.
• Objection to the testimony of a witness for
lack of a formal offer must be made as soon as
the witness begins to testify. Objection to a
question propounded in the course of the oral
examination of a witness must be made as soon
as the grounds therefore become reasonably
apparent.
Section 36.
• Every objection to the admissibility of evidence shall
be made at the time such evidence is offered, or as soon
thereafter as the objection to its admissibility have
become apparent, otherwise the objection shall be
considered waived
– (Abrenica v. Gonda, G.R. No. L- 10100 (1916))
Section 37.
• When repetition of objection unnecessary. 
– When it becomes reasonably apparent in the
course of the examination of a witness that the
question being propounded are of the same class as
those to which objection has been made, whether
such objection was sustained or overruled, it shall
not be necessary to repeat the objection, it being
sufficient for the adverse party to record his
continuing objection to such class of questions.
Section 37.
• When a party desires the court to reject
the court to reject the evidence offered, he
must so state in the form of objection.
(People vs Uy, 327 SCRA 335)
Section 37.
• The purpose of making an objection is to
warn and notify the court and the
opposing counsel that a ruling is
considered erroneous and, if not
corrected, will be the basis of an appellate
review.
- (People vs Siccuan, 271 SCRA 168)
Section 37.
• Objections to evidence must be made
as soon as the grounds therefore
become reasonably apparent.
- (Maunlad Savings & Loan Asso.
Inc vs CA, 346 SCRA 35)
Section 37.
• Failure of party to interpose a timely
objection to the presentation of
testimonial evidence results in the waiver
of any objection to the admissibility
thereof.
- (People vs Sanchez, 308 SCRA 264)
Section 37.
• Contemporary Objection Rule
– requires that a specific and timely objection be
made to the admission of evidence.
Section 38.
• Ruling. — The ruling of the court must be
given immediately after the objection is made,
unless the court desires to take a reasonable
time to inform itself on the question presented;
but the ruling shall always be made during the
trial and at such time as will give the party
against whom it is made an opportunity to
meet the situation presented by the ruling.
Section 38.
• The reason for sustaining or overruling an
objection need not be stated. However, if the
objection is based on two or more grounds, a
ruling sustaining the objection on one or some
of them must specify the ground or grounds
relied upon.
Section 38.
• Rulings of the trial court on procedural questions and
on admissibility of evidence during the course of the
trial are interlocutory in nature and may not be the
subject of separate appeal or review on certiorari, but
are to be assigned as errors and reviewed in the
appeal properly taken from the decision rendered by
the trial court on the merits of the case.
- (Deutche Bank manila vs Chua Yok See, 481 SCRA
672)
Section 38.
• The failure of the judge to rule on the formal
offer of evidence and the objections thereto
will not result in the reversal of the conviction.
The purpose of the requirement is to ensure
that the judge will not consider inadmissible
evidnce in making his decision.
- (People vs Alicante, 332 SCRA 440).
Section 39.
Striking out answer. 
— Should a witness answer the question
before the adverse party had the opportunity to
voice fully its objection to the same, and such
objection is found to be meritorious, the court
shall sustain the objection and order the
answer given to be stricken off the record.
Section 39.
• On proper motion, the court may also order the
striking out of answers which are incompetent,
irrelevant, or otherwise improper.
Section 39.
• Amended: Should a witness answer the question
before the adverse party had the opportunity to voice
fully its objection to the same, or where a question is
not objectionable, but the answer is not responsive, or
where a witness testifies without a questions being
posed or testifies beyond limits set by the court, or
when the witness does a narration instead of
answering the question, and such objection is found
to be meritorious, the court shall sustain the objection
and order such answer, testimony or narration to be
stricken off the record.
Section 39.
• On proper motion, the court may also order the
striking out of answers which are incompetent,
irrelevant or otherwise improper.
Section 40.
Tender of excluded evidence. 
If documents or things offered in evidence
are excluded by the court, the offeror may
have the same attached to or made part of the
record. If the evidence excluded is oral, the
offeror may state for the record the name and
other personal circumstances of the witness
and the substance of the proposed testimony.