Introduction

O Importance -every rule oI law, presupposes the existence oI a

given set oI Iacts to which the precept is to apply.
O !rompt and accurate ascertainment oI Iacts existing in a given
case becomes indispensable task Ior all state agencies,
tribunals, boards, or commission entrusted with prompt and
impartial administration oI justice according to law.
O #ules oI evidence are designed to enable the inquiry to proceed
with the least waste oI time and eIIort, and at the same time
guard against prejudice and arbitrariness.
O %he Iunction emphasizes their importance to all who are
concerned with the rule oI law.

"uestion oI Iact and law prepositions. %he outcome oI trials is
determined by question oI Iact and prepositions oI law.
- certain Iact or group oI Iacts exist.
- #ule oI law is a process having its own separate rules not
here involved.
- %he proposition oI law asserted by the parties depends
upon the proposition oI Iact; where the rule oI evidence
come in.
#ole oI evidence question oI Iact exert a great inIluence than
propositions oI law in litigation`s result
- Evidence is the material oIIered to persuade the trier oI
Iacts about the Iact question in a lawsuit.
- #ules oI evidence govern which oI these materials can be
considered by the trier oI Iact in resolving such questions.

O %he law oI evidence legal evidence consisting oI those rules,
statutory and judicial, which regulate the acceptance or
rejection oI the inIormation to a legal tribunal which will
justiIy a judgment or conclusion upon an issue beIore it.
- #ules are adopted in the way evidence shall be presented or
objected to
- Mode and order which its parts shall assume
- Extent oI its recognition and persuasiveness
- "uantity and quality oI prooI required or suIIicient on any
particular matter submitted.
$ubstantive rights, duties and liabilities
!rocedural rules governing, the application oI substantive
law in a particular cases
The law of evidence is tha part of the law of procedure which,
with a view to ascertain individual rights and liabilities in
particular cases, a) what may or may not be proved in such
cases, b) what sort of ividence must be given of a fact which
may be proved, and c) by whom and in what manner the
evidence must be produced by which any fact is to be proved
(sir James Stephen)
aw of evidence according to Thayer, the law of evidence is the
law which has to do with the furnishing of matter of fact, a)
prescribes the manner of presenting evidence, by requiring
that it shall be given in open court by one who personally
knows the thing to be true, appearing in person, subfect to
cross-examination, or by allowing it to be given by deposition,
taken in such a way, and the like, b) fixes he qualification and
the privileges of witnesses, and the more of examining them, c)
determines, as mong probative matters, things which are
logically and in their nature evidential, what classes of things
shall not be receive
vidence offered must correspond with the allegations and be
confined to the point of issue
xclusion rules- evidence, when applied to the same subfect in
legal procedure must be limited to. first, to those
circumstances which courts consider legally relevant, and
second, to those forms or modes of presentation which are
considered (a) trustworthy and (b) not a waste of time.
clusionary rule - used for evidence ecluded by the
constitution

#&$ OF 'ID
#& 128
General Provisions
$%IO 1.Evidence defined. - vidence is the means,
sanctioned by these rules, of ascertaining in a judicial
proceeding the truth respecting a matter of fact. (1)
Means oI ascertainment
$anctioned by these rules
In a judicial proceeding
%he truth respecting the matter oI Iact
1.Other deIinitions
%hayer any matter oI Iact which is Iurnished to a legal
tribunal, by reasoning or by reIerence to what is noticed
without prooI, as the basis oI inIerence in ascertaining some oI
the matter oI Iact ( 3 harv L #ev 142.)
igmore- represents any knowable Iact or group oI Iacts, not
a legal or a logical principle, considered with a view to its
being oIIered beIore a legal tribunal Ior the purpose oI
producing persuasion, positive or negative, on the part oI the
tribunal, as to the truth oI a proposition, not oI law or oI logic,
on which the determination oI the tribunal is to be asked (3
rd

ed., $1)
etham- matter oI Iact; the eIIect, tendency or design oI which
is to produce in mind a persuasion aIIirmative
or negative oI the existence oI some other matter oI Iact.
*****evidentiary Iact rather than manner oI bringing the Iact
2. A#&MEN% AND EVIDENCE presentation oI elemental Iacts
and in piercing hem together so as to reach the conclusion is evidence.
%he invocation by counsel oI ordinary rules oI logic and rhetoric in the
combination oI assumed Iacts as distinguished Irom presentation oI
evidence is argumentation.
3.%he problem oI ascertaining the Iacts relationship between
FAC%&M !#OBAND&M AND FAC%&M !#OBAN$
a) Factum probandum or proposition to be established is the
ultimate Iact. %he determination oI which are necessary Ior the
application oI a particular law or a legal precept is the
Ioundation upon which the law on evidence rests. %he question
on what Iacts the decision turns is no oI question oI evidence
but oI substantive branch oI the law. %he !#O!O$I%ION oI
which evidence may be oIIered is given by the rules oI
substantive law, entitling a person to relieI or Irom which may
reasonably be inIerred, otherwise it become immaterial. What
is the proposition to be proved ( one party aIIirms and the other
denies- the Iact in issue.
b) Factum probans or material evidencing the proposition is the
evidentiary Iact or the Iact by which the probandum is
established. evidentiary Iacts. It signiIies the relation between
Iacts. %he diIIerence would be not in the nature oI the prooI
but in the nature oI Iacts required to be proved. What is the
evidentiary Iact oIIered to prove it- Ior practical purposes as
existent and is oIIered as such Ior the consideration oI the
court. It is brought Iorward as a reality Ior the purpose oI
convincing the tribunal that the proposition (I probandum) is
also a reality.
4. %O $E%%LE %E #ELA%ION 4 questions
a) Admissibility- what Iacts are presented as evidence
b) Burden oI prooI and presumption by whom must
evidence be presented

c) OI what proposition in issue need be presented without

evidence. treatise in evidence because their material is
chieIly evidential material and their problems have been
discriminated Irom the strictly evidential problem.
5. OW J&#AL CONFLIC% I$ !#E$EN%ED
a) Complaint process summons
b) !leadins determines the Iacts in dispute (ascertainment oI
disputes)
c) earing or trial demonstration oI rights and liabilities
establish respective positions.
d) Judgment determination oI disputes by court
e) Execution enIorcement
Jural relation a right as to the plaintiII and a liability as to the
deIendant that the law oI evidence comes in.
6. CLA$$IFICA%ION OF #&LE$ OF EVIDENCE
a) #ules of probative policy improve the probative value oI the
evidence oIIered
i. Exclusionary rules excluded on grounds partly oI
relevance and policy
ii. !reIerential rules one is preIerred over the other. Ex
under the best evidence rule is the original document
iii. Analytic rules subject certain kinds oI evidence to
rigid scrutiny to expose its possible weakness and
shortcomings. Opportunity must be given to cross-
examine the witness in order to bring out omissions in
his testimony, without which the testimony is hearsay
and is without probative value.
iv. !rophylactic rules certain measures to prevent risk or
Ialsity or mistake. Witness take an oath beIore
testiIying or a party can move Ior the separation oI
witnesses beIore testiIying to prevent collusion.
v. "uantitative rules requires certain kinds oI evidence
to be produced in speciIic quantity. Ex, an extrajudicial
conIession made by the accused shall not be suIIicient
ground Ior conviction unless corroborated by evidence
by the corpus delicti(body oI the crime)

b) #ules of extrinsic policy rules that seek to exclude useIul
evidence Ior the sake oI upholding other policies considered
more paramount and are either absolute or conditional.
Illegally seized evidence is inadmissible in any proceedings.
($ec 3 (2). Art III, Consti)
7. KIND$ OF EVIDENCE
a) relevant evidence can establish probability or
improbability oI a Iact in issue. ($ec 4, #ule 128, #ules oI Crt)
b) material evidence directed to prove a Iact in issue as
determined by the rules oI substantive law and pleadings
c) competent evidence- when it is not excluded by law in a
particular case.
d) direct and circumstantial evidence direct or positive when
the evidence proves the Iact in dispute without the aid oI any
inIerence or presumption; circumstantial is the prooI oI Iact or
Iacts Irom which, taken sisngly or collectively, the existence oI
the particular Iact in dispute may be inIerred as a necessary or
probable consequence.
e) positive and negative evidence witness aIIirms that a Iact
did or did not occur and negative when he states that he did not
see or know the occurrence oI a Iact.
I) rebutting evidence Iact given to repel, resist, contradict or
disprove Iacts given by the other party.
g) primary or best and secondary evidence greatest certainty
oI the Iact in question is primary evidence; secondary, being
inIerior, indicates the existence oI more original source oI
inIormation; aIIects the weight oI evidence, and should be

distinguished Irom the best and secondary evidence rule under

$ec 3 and 4 or #ule 130 oI rules oI court)
h) expert evidence testimony oI one particularly competent
authority, or possessing in regard with one particular subject oI
human activity, knowledge not usually acquired by other
person.
i) prima facie evidence evidence standing alone unexplained
or uncontroverted, suIIicient to maintain the proposition
aIIirmed. In law, it is suIIicient to establish the Iact, and iI not
rebutted, remains suIIicient Ior the purpose. (#! vs
Sandiganbayan, G# No 112708-09, mar 29, 1996) It is that
which suffices for the proof of a particular fact, until
contradicted and overcome by other evidence.
j) conclusive evidence inconvertible
k) cumulative evidence. additional evidence oI the same kind
bearing on the same point. Evidence is not inadmissible
simply because it is cumulative by considerable discretion may
be exercise by the judge to determine the extent to which such
evidence is to be received, and limiting the number oI
witnesses to testiIy on a particular Iact.
l) corroborative additional evidence oI a diIIerent king and
character, tending prove the same point.
Evidence is the means oI prooI, prooI is the eIIect oI the
evidence, the establishment oI a Iact by evidence.whenever
all of the evidence is of such a character as to convince the
intellect and conscience of men of a fact, then the fact is
proved. !roof is that degree and quantity of evidence that
produces conviction.
%estimonial evidence- testimony given in open court by
witness who has knowledge oI the Iacts;
Documentary public or private records, photos, maps and the
like in Iorm oI tangible objects or exhibits.
Opinion- Iactual details is awkward, conIusing or inadequate
that would require opinion oI experts by education, training or
experience in particular Iields.( sec 49, 50 oI #ule 130)
Stipulation as to evidence parties to a contract may legally
stipulate as to the eIIect oI certain types oI evidence on the
contractual rights oI the parties, so long as their agreements do
not inIringe upon the jurisdiction oI the courts.

$ec. 2.$cope. - %he rules of evidence shall be the same in
all courts and in all trials and hearings, ecept as otherwise
provided by law or these rules. (2a) chanrobles v
1. $ecs 1 and 2 are applicable in judicial proceeding in regular
courts and are not applicable to administrative proceedings.
$ubstantial evidence in administrative or quasi-judicial bodies.
($ec 5, #ule 133; Feria, phil legal studies, series no 4)
2. 'except as otherwise provided in these rules was added.
Exception is Iound in $ec 24 oI B! 129 which provides that
certain special rules oI procedure applicable under certain cases
shall continue to be applied (agrarian cases) unless
subsequently amended by law or by rules oI court by $C.
3. #ules oI admissibility are generally the same Ior the trial oI
civil and criminal cases. II some rules are applicable to a
criminal case, it is bec oI special consideration aIIecting a
particular issue or particular sort oI evidence rather than the
general policy. Whether a matter is true or Ialse is applicable
to all cases.asic principle in admissibility of evidence except
to the extent that evidence is excluded by the policy or
constitutional considerations. To impose rules retrictions on
the courts and not to impose on lesser bodies manifest a
greater public confidence in the discretionary capacity of
admin bodies than in the fudges.
preponderance oI evidence oI greater weight, more convincing
than that which is oIIered. %he evidence oIIered in civil case is more
credible and conclusive than that oI the other.

prooI beyond reasonable doubt with moral certainty, or that

degree oI prooI which produces conviction in an unprejudiced
mind, Ior criminal cases.( sec 2, rule 133)
substantial evidence- that amount oI relevant evidence which a
reasonable mind might accept as suIIicient to Iorm a belieI or
conclusion on administrative proceedings. (sec 5., rule 133)
same rules shall be applied in tribunals oI an admin or quasi-judicial
where the resolution oI Iactual disputes is the object oI an inquiry
except to the extent that they are necessary to insure due process oI
law. But technical rules are rather relaxed in admin so as not to
obstruct justice, thus all relevant evidence shall be admitted.
Admission or exclusion oI evidence would rather depend on whether
the tribunal is an admin body vested with judicial or quasi-judicial
power or established court, it does not Iollow that variations depending
on the nature oI the proceedings.
Constitutional considerations must be given in criminal cases:
- #ight oI conIrontation
- #ight oI deIendant to be represented by a counsel
- #ight against unreasonable search and seizures
- #ight against selI incrimination
"uantum of evidence differs accdg to the nature of the proceedings.w
library
$ec. 3.dmissibility of evidence. - vidence is admissible
when it is relevant to the issue and is not ecluded by the
law of these rules. (3a)
#equisites: 1) relevant, as determined by logic, human
experience and common sense.
2). Competent, iI no excluded by the law or by rules.
$ec. 4.#elevancy collateral matters. - vidence must have
such a relation to the fact in issue as to induce belief in its
eistence or non-eistence. vidence on collateral matters
shall not be allowed, ecept when it tends in any reasonable
degree to establish the probability or improbability of the
fact in issue. (4a)