Rule 132, Section 36
. evidence of an allegedagreement under the statutes of
OBJECTION
– Objection to the question for being improper in cross-
Objection to evidence offered orally must be
madeimmediately after the offer is made.
Land Bank vs. Veronica (GR 176692, June
27, 2012)
Objection to a question propounded in the course of
the oralexamination of a witness shall be made as
soon as thegrounds therefore shall become
reasonably apparent.An offer of evidence in writing
shall be objected to within 3days after notice of the
offer
unless
a different period isallowed by the court.In any case,
the grounds for the objections must be
specified
. later stage of the proceedings.
Specific grounds of objection.
The usual grounds for objection are the following:a.
Objection to the question for being leading;b.
Objection to the question for it calls for hearsay
evidence;c.
Objection to the question for lack of basis, or it
assumes a fact notestablished;d.
Objection to the question for it invades the field of
confidentialcommunication;e.
Objection to the question for being vague;f.
Objection to the question for it calls for a conclusion
of law;g.
Objection to the question for it calls for a conclusion
of fact;h.
Objection to the question for being argumentative;i.
Objection to the question for the proper foundation
has not beenlaid; j.
Objection to the question for it calls for the opinion
of the witness;k.
Objection to the question for being misleading;l.
Objection to the question for it has already been
answered;m.
Objection to the question for the witness is
incompetent;n.
Objection to the question for being inadmissible
under the parolevidence rule;o.
Objection to the question for it attempts to elicit from
the witnessself-serving evidence;p.
Objection to the question for the document offered is
self-serving;
q.
Objection to the question for it tends to elicit
evidence which is notthe best evidence;r.
Objection to the question for it calls for parol
fraud;s.
examination;t.
Objection to the question for being improper in re-
directexamination; andu.
Objection to the question for being improper in re-
crossexamination.
Effect of Failure to Object
The failure to object to incompetent evidence has
been held not to render otherincompetent evidence
admissible in corroboration thereof. Nor by having
failed toobject to the admission of improper evidence
at one time does a party lose or waive theright to
object to like evidence when it is offered at a
Premature Objection
An objection to evidence cannot be made in advance
of the offer of the evidence soughtto be introduced.
Example:
An objection to the testimony of a witness on the
ground that he isdisqualified, before such
disqualification is shown, cannot be availed of
because ofsubsequent proof of disqualification.
Waiver of objection to oral evidence
1 An objection may be expressly waived.2.
Implied waiver;Examples:a.
Failure to make the objection at the proper timeb.
Curing of an error of admission by the opponent’s
subsequent use of evidence
similar to that already objected to or prior use of
similar inadmissible evidencec.
Testimony stricken out during the direct examination,
where on cross-examination, counsel asked questions
from the witness in connection withanswers given in
the direct examination.
Effect of waiver of objection or failure to
object
Failure to object evidence at time it is offered is a
waiver of objections to itsadmissibility. The waiver is
operative, not only as to substantially the same
testimonygiven in other portions of the examination
of the witness and subsequent proceedingson the
trial, but also as affecting the right to have questions
of its admissibility reviewedon appeal or writ of error