IV. .1,; YI U J,: N C' J,; (l<1dc11 I :rn.

1·n J
( !\ ~ 11111c1Hlcd hy /\ .M. No. l'J-OK- 1~-SC' cf'lcel ivc M;,y 1. 207.0),..

/\ , l'l<l •:I .IMI N/\1< Y ('C>NS II >l !J</\'f'IC >N

(R uic 17.X, Sccli1111:1 1-'1 . Clc11cnil l'rovi11 iw1HJ

I . I )clinil io11/Mc1111i1111, 1111d Scope of' I •:.

2. Kinds 1111d C'lrnmifical io1 11, 111' I ~.
J . /\ xio111s ol t\d111ir,mihil il.y
a, lfolcv:u1cy
h. ( 'ompclc11cy
c. /\utlic11licil.y
d. <>lkr
'1 . Kinds ol'admiHsihilil y
ti. COIH.lilional
h. mulliplc
c. c11rntivc

Cases:
I. Ong Chia v.v. l<e11uhlic, 32H ,C..,'(,'1<11
- on natura/i=atfon
2. 1/,u/ueta vs. r:11, 253 S(,'f(/1
- fJn privacy rd·communlcatifJn & corre.vpondence
3. /Jeople vs. Yatar, 12H SC/<11
- on the right af!,ainst .ve(fincrimlnatlon (IJN/1)
4. 'fating vs. Marcella, 51fJ .'-;r;1<11
- on admi.v.vlhility, weight and sufficiency rd' evidence
5. /Jeople vs. Sa/a/ranca, r;r;r; SCl<A
- multiple admissihility
6. SCC Chemicals Cr,rp. vs. CA, 353 SCl<A
- curative admissihility (hearsay evidence admis.vlhle
when nfJI objected)

Sec. 3 int1erted the wordN "the Con.vtitution" •

B._wJ IAT NfED NOT ill~_f_f~ >VEfl

(l<ulc 129, Sections 1-4))

I. Judicfatl Notice
a. mandatory and discrctionlJry
b. when to take judicial notice
2. Judicittl Admis~ion~
ct when iKthere judicial admissions
c~er-,:
/ , /JJ/' vs. /Jana/, 434 SCl<A
- contenl!i ofthe record'/ fJf other cases
2. /-'efJp!e v.v, Kulal.v, 292 sr 'f<A

"I I
 - <!.·1t·s1imo n1t·s m otht-·r <-\1St'S
-~- ;_~nuc.·<mo ,·s. CA. -~~-I SCRA.
- ll-..in,is..._•11bilirr
- o(forc,
... .
~
i 011 lmrs
-!. .\ !.1~111lmg ,·s. CO.\ /ELEC. -oo SCR.-t
- a.tnussibiliry cf 1ort'ign laws o_t)icial rl'cords
5. Pt:op!c· \"S. Saharan. 639 SCR.-l
- aainL,sibiluy of c:Hrcy·udicial co,tession p lea ofguilty
6. Rc:puNrc ,·s. Sandiganbay an. 66_, SCR..-l
- 2.xc2p1io11 ro admissibiliry cf resrimo11ies in orher cases
-_ Ligras ,·s. People. -6 - SCR.-l I
- adm issibility ofdecisions and records in other cases

Amended Sections 1. 3 and./ br

.
inserrino
0
cenain words *

C. RC-LES OF .-\D\ OSSIBlLITY

(R ule 130. Sections 1-5-t)

1. Obj~t Real E,i dence lSection 1)

Cases:
I. Salas ,·s. .\fatusalem. 705 SCR-l
-ho w ro esrablish patemiry andfiliation
2. People ,·s. .\fercury de la Cur=, 802 SCRA. Sept. 7, 20 I 6
3. People ,·s. _\,fam,el De la Rosa, Dec. 13, 2017
-I. People vs. Sanche=. .\Iarch 7. 2018
5. People ,·s. Emmanuel O/ira. January 7. 2019
- on chain ofc usrody rule

2. Documentary Evidence (Sections 2-10)

Cases:
I. St. Martin Polychnic. Inc. vs. lfVV Const. Corp. 847 SCRA
2. People vs. l 'ibar. 858 SCRA
- on admissibility ofprivate documents

a The Best Evidence Rule

Cases:
/. 1\tlCMP Const. vs. 1\lonark, Nove. 10. 2014
2. Loon vs. Power At/aster, Inc. , 712 SCR.rl
3. Dimaguila vs. Monteiro, 714 SCRA
4. Republic vs. Mupas, 769 SCRA
5. Robina/ vs. Bassig. 845 SCRA

b. Secondary Evidence

c. Parole Evidence
Cases:
I. Leoveras vs. Va/de=. 652 SCRA
2. Paras vs. Kimwa Const., 755 SC RA
3. PNB vs. Pasimio. 769 SCRA
 4. Manco/ vs. DBP, 846 SCRA
Amendme11ts arefouml i11 Sections 2, 3, J(b), 3(c), 4 (ll)(b)(c), 7 {9 is now /0}

d. Electronic Evidence
-AM. 01-7-01-SC, Rules on Electronic Evidence
- R.A 8792, E-Commerce Law
Cases:
I. Heirs ofSabanpan vs. Comorposa, 408 SCRA
2. Torres vs. PAGCOR, 661 SCRA
3. Ang vs. Republic, 6/8 SCRA
4. People vs. Enojas
5. Syhunliong vs. Rivera, June 4, 20 I 4
6. Bartolome vs. Maranan, 740 SCRA
7. BBB vs. AAA, 750 SCRA
8. Astorga & Repol law Offices vs.
Villanueva, 751 SCRA

Section 4 of Rule 130 incorporated Electronic Evi<lence rule

Sections 11-20 remain: lnterpretatio11 of Documents

3. Testimonial Evidence (Sections 21-54)

a. Qualifications: "one who can perceive and perceiving can

make known his perception"
i. ability to observe/perceive
ii. ability to recall/remember
iii. ability to relate/communicate

b. Disqualifications:
Case: Marcos vs. Heirs of Andres Navarro, 700 SCRA
Note: mental incapacity or immaturity in Section 21 has been deleted.
Is it no longer a disqualification?
Case: People vs. Golimlim, 427 SCRA

i. marital disqualification (Sec. 23)

Cases:
1 Alvarez vs. Ramirez, 473 SCRA.
2.Peop/e vs. Castaneda, 88 SCRA
ii. privileged communication (Sec. 24)
Cases:
1. Chan vs. Chan, 702 SCRA
2. Lacurom vs. Jacoba, 484 SCRA
3. Sama/a vs. Valencia, 514 SCRA
4. Almonte vs. Vasque::, 244 SCRA
5. Syhunliong vs. Rivera, 725 SCRA

iii. death or insanity/dead man's statute (Section 39)

Cases:
I. Ra::on vs. CA, 207 SCRA

33
 2. Sunga-Chan vs. Chua. 363 SCRA
3. Bordalba vs. CA, 374 SCRA
Discuss Executive Privilege under the doctrines laid down in Senate ofthe
Philippines vs. Ermita (488 SCRA) and Neri vs. Senate Committees (435 SCRA)

c. Testimonial Privilege
i. Parental and filial privilege (Section 25)
ii. Privilege relating to trade secrets (Section 26)

d. Admission of a Party (Section 27)

- by third parties (S-29)
- by partners (S-30)
- by conspirators (S-31)
- by privies (S-32)
- by silence (S-33)
Cases:
1. Constantino vs. Heirs ofPedro Constantino, Jr.
706 SCRA
2. Cambe vs. Ombudsman, 812 SCRA Dec. 6, 2016
3. Ocampo vs. Ocampo, 830 SCRA

e. Offer of Compromise (Section 28)

f Confessions (Section 34)

- judicial vs. extra-judicial
Cases:
a. People vs. Dacanay, 807 SCRA, (20 16)
b. People vs. Opiniano, 832 (2017)
c. Cruz vs. People, 846 SCRA

g. Previous Conduct (Section 35)

Cases:
1. People vs. Santos, 221 SCRA 715
2. People vs. Nardo, 353 SCRA 339
3. RP vs. Heirs ofAlejaga, Sr., 393 SCRA 361

h. Hearsay Evidence Rule (Sections 37-49)

Cases: Patula vs. People, 669 SCRA
People vs. Aguirre, 845 (independently relevant statement)
i. Exceptions:
i. Dying Declaration: Pp vs. Calinawan, 817 SCRA 424
ii. Statement of decedent or person of unsound mind
111. Declaration against interest: Pp vs. Bernal, 274 SCRA
iv Declaration about pedigree: Ti=on vs. CA, 276 SCRA
v. family Reputation or tradition: Ji son vs. CA, 286 SCRA
vi. Common reputation
vii. Res gestae: Pp vs. Dimapilit, 836 SCRA;Pp vs. Santillan
837 SCRA 71
viii. Records of regularly conducted business activity

34
I
I
(formerly, e11trie,5 i11 tl,e course of business)
I Phil. A ir/ines vs Ramos, 207 SCRA 46 I
ix. Entries in Ollicial Records: Pp vs. Corpuz, 856 SCRA 6/0;
Sabili vs. COMELEC, 670 SCRA; Cercado-Siga, 752 SCRA
x. Commercial lists: Mera/co vs. Quisumbing, 336 SCRA
xi. Learned treatises
xii. Testimony or deposition at a former proceeding: Pp vs.
Orti=-Miyako, 279 SCRA; Go vs. People, 677 SCRA
xiii. Child Witness Rule: People vs. Ibanez, 706 SCRA
People vs. Esugon, 759
xiv. Residual exception (Sectio11 50)

J. Opinion Rule Sections 5 J-53)

i. Expert Witness: Lavare= vs. Guevarra, 822 SCRA 130
Avelino vs. People, 701 SCRA
ii. Ordinary Witness: Pp vs. Duranan, 349 SCRA

k. Character Evidence (Section 54)

People vs. Deopita, 436 SCRA 794

D. BURDEN OF PROOF, BURDEN OF EVIDENCE AND PRESUMPTIONS

(Rule 131 , Sections 1-6)

I . Burden of Proof vs. Burden of Evidence

Case: FEBTC vs. Chante, 707 SCRA

2. Presumptions
a. Conclusive presumptions
i. lbaan Rural bank vs. CA, 32 / SCRA
ii. Alcaraz vs. Tangga-an, 401 SCRA
iii. University ofMindanao vs. PSP, 778 SCRA (l/ /// /6)
b. Disputable presumptions
i. Rosaroso vs. Soria, 699 SCRA
ii. Heirs of Trazona vs. Heirs o/Canada, 712 SCRA
iii. Uy vs. Lacsamana, 767 SCRA
iv. Diaz vs. People, 776 SCRA 43

- suppression of testimony: People vs. Padrigone, 382 SCRA

Metrobank vs. CA, 333 SCRA
- official duty: De /os Santos vs. COA, 703 SCRA ; Pp vs. Barte, 819 SCRA
People vs. Candidia, 707 SCRA
- cohabitation: People vs. Edua/ino, 271 SCRA

- survivorship; absence

3. Legitimacy or Illegitimacy (Section 4)

35
 4. Presumptions in civil actions/criminal actions (Sections 5 & 6)

E. PRESENTATION OF EVIDENCE
(Rule 132, Sections 1-40)

l . Examination of Witnesses (Sections 1-18)

- Order of Presentation of Evidence. People vs Fabre, 385 SCRA
- Leading and Misleading Questions. People vs. Perez, 397 SCRA
- Impeachment. People vs. Castellano, 400 SCRA
- Reference to Memorandum
- Present Memory Revived, People vs. Plasencia, 249 SCRA
- Past Recollection Recorded, Canque vs. CA, 305 SCRA

Note: Fonner Section 14 transposed to Section 54 of 130

2. Authentication and Proof of Documents (Sections 19-33)

- Classes of Documents
- Public Documents
Cases: I. fwasawa vs. Gangan, 705 SCRA
2. Asian Terminals vs. Philam Insurance, 702 SCRA
- Private Documents
- Offer of Evidence. Aludos vs. Suerte, 673 SCRA; Westmont
Investment Corporation vs. Francia, Jr., 661 SCRA

(What is the Apostille Convention?)

3. Offer and Objection (Sections 34-40)

-Tender of Excluded Evidence
Fortune Tabacco Corp. vs. Com ofInt. Rev.,761 SCRA 173

F. WEIGHT AND SUFFICIENCY OF EVIDENCE

(Rule 133, Sections 1-8)

The Hierarchy of Evidence:

1. Overwhelming Evidence

ii. Proof Beyond Reasonable Doubt." That degree of proof which

produces conviction in an unprejudiced mind"
1. People vs. Caliso - 659 SCRA
2. People vs. Patentes - 716 SCRA
3. People vs. Arcenal - 821 SCRA 549
4. People vs. Alboka - 856 SCRA 252

36
 111. Clear and Convincing
/. Supreme Court vs. Delgado - 658 SC RA
2. Govt ofHongkong Special Adm. Region
Vs. Olalia, Jr. - 521 SC RA
3. People vs. Fontanilla - 664 SC RA
4. People vs. Cabiles, 82 7 SC RA

1v. Preponderance of Evidence

/. PCIB vs. Balmaceda - 658 SCRA

2. De la Liana vs. Biong - 711 SCRA i
3 .. Canlao vs. People - 659 SCRA (equipoise doctrine)

v. Substantial Evidence

/. Office of the Ombudsman vs. Reyes - 658 SCRA

2. Ramos vs. BPI Family Savings Bank - 711 SCRA

v1. Prima facie evidence

1. Lucas vs. Lucas- 650 SCRA

2. Estate ofMarcos vs. Republic - 814 SCRA 600
3. Marcos vs. Cabrera-Faller - 8 15 SCRA 285

v11. Probable Cause

/. PNB vs. Tria - 671 SCRA

2. Del Castillo vs. People - 664 SCRA

vu1. Iota of Evidence (circumstantial)

1.. People vs. Anticamara - 651 SCRA
2. People vs. Deocampo 666 SCRA
3. Ce/edonio vs. People, 761 SCRA 363
4. Bacerra vs. People, 828 SCRA 525

By: Henedi,,o M. Brondial, Sr.

Chair, Remedial Law Department
Arellano University School of Law

37