THIRD SESSION (OCTOBER 13, 2016) THERE ARE FOUR RULES GOVERNING DOCUMENTARY

EVIDENCE-
EVIDENCE is defined as- The means sanctioned by the Rules, The first rule states that-
of ascertaining in a judicial proceeding the truth respecting the When the original writing is available and is the best
truth respecting a matter of fact. evidence of the facts contained therein, lesser evidence
And it appears in a variety of forms- thereof is not admissible. It is referred to as –
[A] THE BEST EVIDENCE RULE
If it is the physical evidence that itself plays a direct part in the Meaning that- The original writing need not be produced in
incident in question. If it is the one addressed to the senses of each of the following five (5) instances.--
the court, then it is classified as - [B] REAL OR OBJECT
EVIDENCE THERE ARE FIVE [5] EXCEPTIONS TO THE BEST
EVIDENCE RULE-
If it appears in the form of documents, papers or writings that 1. When the original writing is not available; or
contain information relevant to the case- It is classified as – 2. When the original is in the custody of the adverse party
[C] DOCUMENTARY EVIDENCE who refused to produce it notwithstanding notice.
3. When the original is a public record in the custody of a
If it is elicited from the witness in the form of his testimony public officer. When the original of the document is in the
offered to prove the truth of the matter asserted - custody of a public officer or is recorded in a public office,
Then it is classified as- [D] TESTIMONIAL EVIDENCE its content may be proved by a certified copy of the said
original issued by the public officer in custody of the
Autoptic evidence and demonstrative evidence are classes of - document.
[B] OBJECT EVIDENCE 4. When it contains numerous accounts which cannot be
examined without great loss of time and the fact to be
If an object or document is offered to the court as proof or proven is only the general result of the whole.
evidence of the truthfulness of an allegation or a fact in issue- It 5. When the subject of the inquiry is not the contents of the
is then called as - [C] AN EXHIBIT documents but other matters - SUCH AS-
a. The EXISTENCE of the document; Answer: [B] PAROL EVIDENCE
b. The DUE EXECUTION of the document; or
c. The LOCATION of the document. The SECONDARY EVIDENCE RULE may be simply stated as
follows: If there is no original writing, secondary evidence
Meaning of DUE EXECUTION- By due execution is meant that will take its place.
the party whose signature it bears signed it voluntarily or that it
was signed by another for him with his permission or authority. REQUIREMENTS FOR ADMISSIBILITY OF SECONDARY
EVIDENCE
Note that-
When the original writing is not available for one reason or FIRST: The secondary evidence must be relevant to the fact in
another, the next best evidence will be - a SECONDARY issue;
EVIDENCE thereof. SECOND: The party introducing it must show by satisfactory
and convincing proof that the original writing is –
SECONDARY EVIDENCE RULE (a) Duly executed by the parties; or
also called SUBSTITUTIONARY RULE (b) Lost or destroyed, or
also called INFERIOR EVIDENCE RULE. (c) In the custody of the adverse party who refuses to produce
the original after reasonable notice.
Meaning of SECONDARY EVIDENCE- It is that which is THREE CLASSES OF SECONDARY EVIDENCE:
substitutionary or inferior to primary or best evidence or original 1. Copy of the original
document which was either lost, destroyed or unavailable. 2. Recital of its content in some authentic document, and
3. Recollection of a witness.
If the subject of the inquiry is the contents of the writing,
there can be no evidence of its contents other than the original. NOTES on:
Question: WHAT IS THE BEST EVIDENCE OF A WRITTEN (a) COPY OF THE ORIGINAL-
AGREEMENT WHEN THE ORIGINAL WRITING IS LOST, 1. The copy need not be a certified copy – BUT IT MUST
DESTROYED or CANNOT BE PRODUCED? BE SHOWN TO BE AN ACCURATE COPY-
 2. The photocopy reproduced faithfully out of the original NOTES on:
copy are only secondary evidence of the contents of the (c) RECOLLECTIONS OF A WITNESS –
original; Who are the persons qualified to give testimony of the contents
3. A certified copy of the original document before it was of a writing?
lost is only secondary evidence of its contents. 1. Any person who signs or reads the document,
4. Machine copies of the original are secondary evidence or hears it read knowing that the document so read is the
and as such. same document as the one in question;
Therefore, it cannot be admitted unless it is first shown that it 2. Any person who is present when the contents of the writing
falls under one of the exceptions - is being talked over by the parties concerned, to such extent as
That is, that the original writing is to give such person reasonably full information relative to its
a.- lost, destroyed or cannot be produced in court, or contents.
b.- in the possession of the adverse party. 3. Any person to whom the parties to the instrument made
known the contents thereof.
5. Lists of expenses are secondary evidence -
They cannot replace receipts issued, - as in the case of RECAPITULATION of the SECONDARY EVIDENCE RULE
purchases of gasoline or food.
Before a party can introduce SECONDARY EVIDENCE
NOTES on: of a writing, the proponent must first prove the following, in the
(b) RECITALS- following order:
1. The recital is not required to appear in a public document. EELC
It may also be made in a private document provided that the 1. EXISTENCE
reciting document proved to be exact and authentic. 2. EXECUTION
3. LOSS (or destruction or unavailability of the original) and
4. CONTENTS.
 After proving the EXISTENCE, EXECUTION, LOSS of PAROL EVIDENCE RULE states that-
the ORIGINAL DOCUMENT, When an agreement has been reduced in writing, it is
SECONDARY EVIDENCE OF ITS CONTENTS may be proven presumed to contain all the terms agreed upon and there can be
in the following order – C R T admitted no other evidence of such terms and conditions other
1. By a COPY of its contents or than the contents of the document.
2. By a RECITAL of its contents in some authentic document;
3. By the TESTIMONY of a witness as to its contents. STATED BRIEFLY-
The rule is that there can be no evidence of the TERMS
SECONDARY EVIDENCE is not the same as SECOND HAND OF A WRITTEN AGREEMENT other than the CONTENTS OF
EVIDENCE THE WRITTEN AGREEMENT.
First Distinction:
SECONDARY EVIDENCE - refers to evidence which is inferior STATED MORE SIMPLY-
to the best evidence or the original document that was lost, The CONTENTS OF A WRITTEN AGREEMENT are the
destroyed or unavailable. only evidence of the TERMS OF THE WRITTEN AGREEMENT
SECOND HAND EVIDENCE - refers to evidence proceeding of the parties and their successors in interest.
from the mere repetition of what a witness has heard another
person say. “PAROL” is a Latin word which means a “word,” or a
Second Distinction: “speech,” “oral” or “verbal.”
SECONDARY EVIDENCE is SUBSTITUTIONARY EVIDENCE. Hence, a PAROL CONTRACT is a VERBAL CONTRACT.
SECOND HAND EVIDENCE is HEARSAY EVIDENCE. PAROL is not the same as “PAROLE” which means release
from jail, prison or confinement after actually serving a part of a
PAROL EVIDENCE RULE sentence.
also called CONTENTS OF WRITTEN AGREEMENT RULE Also, PAROL EVIDENCE RULE is not the same as the
also called TERMS OF WRITTEN AGREEMENT RULE BEST EVIDENCE RULE.
If what is to be proven is the contents of a writing (which means CONTRACT defined, - It is an agreement between two or more
what the document says), the BEST EVIDENCE RULE applies. persons which creates an obligation to do or not to do a
But when one of the parties says that what the document says particular thing.
is not what was agreed upon by the parties, the PAROL
EVIDENCE RULE applies. EXAMPLES:
Du ut des I give that you may give.
PAROLE EVIDENCE RULE Du ut facias I give that you may do.
prohibits any party from presenting any evidence that will Facio ut des I do that you may give.
-CHANGE, -MODIFY or -VARY an agreement which has been Facio ut facias I do that you may do.
reduced into writing.
WILL defined, - It is an act whereby a person is permitted, with
PURPOSE OF THE PAROL EVIDENCE RULE: the formalities prescribed by law, to control to a certain degree,
To preserve the credibility or the value of a written the disposition of his estate, to take effect after his death.
agreement. In other words –
As a document, a WILL is an instrument by which a
NOTE That- person makes a disposition of his real and personal properties,
The PAROL EVIDENCE RULE is applicable only when to be performed or to take effect after his death.
the writing contains an AGREEMENT or a WILL.
NOTE that-
AGREEMENT defined, - It is a meeting of two or more minds. The PAROL EVIDENCE RULE is solely based on the
existence of a document containing the terms and conditions of
An AGREEMENT is synonymous with a CONTRACT. an AGREEMENT.
But a CONTRACT is not the same as an AGREEMENT. Therefore, PAROLE EVIDENCE RULE cannot apply
where such document does not contain the terms of an
agreement –SUCH AS – a writing which merely describes the
occurrence of a fact or event.
 1. When what is appearing in the document is not a valid
EXAMPLE: binding agreement, either because –
A debtor is sued for non-payment of debt. He presented a. of Lack of Consideration
a receipt showing that he has already paid his loan. b. Want of valid consent due to lack of capacity, fraud or
The RECEIPT presented by the debtor is not an duress;
agreement but only a unilateral assertion by a party that the c Illegality of the subject matter
loan is already paid. d. Illegality of consideration.
The receipt is not, therefore, covered by the PAROL
CONSIDERATION defined,
EVIDENCE RULE.
- It is the inducement to a contract.
- The cause, motive, price or impelling influence which induces
NOTE also-
a contracting party to enter into a contract.
That under the PAROL EVIDENCE RULE, evidence of what the
parties said before or at the time of the agreement cannot be
Illustration:
admitted to alter, contradict, diminish or enlarge the agreement.
A VALID CONTRACT has three essential requisites:
a. CONSENT of the contracting parties
The terms of a contract are rendered conclusive upon the
b. OBJECT and
parties and any evidence aliunde cannot be allowed to change
c. CAUSE or CONSIDERATION
or controvert a complete and enforceable agreement already
embodied in a document.
EXAMPLE OF A VALID CONTRACT:
For the sum of SIXTY THOUSAND PESOS, Pedro
EXCEPTIONS TO THE PAROL EVIDENCE RULE
obliges himself to deliver to Juan his Barako Kawasaki
Motorcycle with Plate No. GG 1234.
PAROL EVIDENCE RULE is not applicable in the following
As far as Pedro is concerned, the object is the
cases where oral evidence may be introduced:
MOTORCYCLE and the cause or consideration is the money.

EXCEPTIONS TO THE PAROL EVIDENCE RULE:

It is the money that induces him to agree to deliver the If Juan was threatened or intimidated into agreeing into
motorcycle to Juan. the contract, or if he was below eighteen years of age at the
As far as Juan is concerned, the object is the MONEY time of the contract,
and the cause or consideration is the MOTORCYCLE.
It is the motorcycle that induces him to agree to pay the Sixty Then, in any of those instances, the CONTRACT is INVALID,
Thousand Pesos to Pedro. Therefore, the PAROL EVIDENCE RULE does not apply, and
Therefore, the parties may introduce oral or testimonial
If the consideration is absent or there is no consideration, such evidence to prove, alter, change or contradict the contents of
as when - the contract.
Juan obliges himself to deliver to Pedro his Barako
Kawasaki with Plate No. GG 1234 on or before October 31, 2. When there is INTRINSIC AMBIGUITY, MISTAKE or
2013, IMPERFECTION in the writing, as when the parties made a
If the subject matter or the OBJECT is ILLEGAL, such as when mistake of fact in expressing their agreement.
the contract reads – INTRINSIC means internal, within itself
Juan obliges himself to pay to Pedro One Hundred
Thousand Pesos if Pedro will kill the Barangay Chairman before When is there an “intrinsic ambiguity” in the writing?
the Barangay election, or 1. When the writing or document admits of two or more
meanings, or
If the CONSIDERATION is ILLEGAL, such as when the contract 2. When it is understood in more than one way, or
reads – 3. When it refers to two or more things at the same time.
In consideration of TEN KILOS of methampethamine Examples:
hydrochloride, Juan obliges to give Pedro his Kawasaki When the parties erred in describing the property being sold, or
Motorcycle with Plate No. GG 1234. in stating that the price was payable in dollars when the
OR- agreement was in pesos
How do you clarify any apparent ambiguity in a written What would be the remedy of a party in case the contract
agreement? or document does not express true intent of the parties?
ANSWER: By the introduction of “evidence aliunde.” ANSWER: Judicial action for reformation of instrument.

3. Where the writing does not express the true intent and What is the so-called JUDICIAL ACTION FOR REFORMATION
agreement of the parties. - OF INSTRUMENT?
Here, the document on its face expresses an agreement It is a remedy in equity by means of which a written
but it is not the true agreement of the parties. instrument is made or construed so as to express or conform to
EXAMPLE: Oral or testimonial evidence may be presented to the real intention of the parties.
prove that a written instrument purporting to transfer absolute
title to a property is in truth and in fact, a contract of mortgage “Remedy in equity” means remedy that is in accordance
executed by the parties for the purpose of securing the payment with fairness.
of a loan.
ANOTHER EXAMPLE: INFERENCE is a mental process by which logical conclusions
Where the document does not perfectly expresses the are reached or drawn from another fact which is supposed,
actual agreement of the parties as where the lawyer who already proven or admitted to be true.
prepared the document failed to use accurate language to state Unlike a presumption, it is not a rule of law but a process
or describe the agreement. of reasoning.
4. Where there are other terms and conditions which the They are deductions and conclusions drawn from other
parties may have agreed upon after the execution of the facts by means of reason and common sense.
agreement. Illustrative Example:
These additional and subsequent terms may be proven If it was proven that Mr. XXX did not know how to drive, it can
even if entered into by the successors-in-interest of the parties, be concluded that he could not have been the driver of the get-
but not by those strangers to the agreement. away car used in the robbery.
Another Example:
If it was proven that Mr. XXX was left-handed and the stab is also called PRESUMPTION “JURIS ET DE JURE.”
wound sustained by the victim could have only been inflicted by
a right-handed man, logic and reason dictate that Mr. XXX could THERE ARE ONLY TWO INSTANCES OF CONCLUSIVE
not be the killer. PRESUMPTIONS:
1. ESTOPPEL IN PAIS also called ESTOPPEL BY CONDUCT
WHAT ARE “PRESUMPTIONS?” 2. PRESUMPTION IN FAVOR OF A LANDLORD
PRESUMPTION
is a rule of law that because a basic fact exists, another ESTOPPEL IN PAIS or ESTOPPEL BY CONDUCT - exists
fact also exists. when a person, by his acts, representations or omissions, or by
is not evidence but a rule of law, while inference is not. his silence when he ought to speak out, intentionally or through
It is a rule by which finding a basic fact gives rise to the culpable negligence, induces another to believe certain facts to
existence of a presumed fact. exist and such other person relies and acts on such beliefs, so
It is used to signify that which may be assumed without that he will be prejudiced if the former will be permitted to deny
proof, or taken for granted. the existence of such fact.

As a rule of law, presumptions are of two categories: Illustrative Example of ESTOPPEL IN PAIS:
(a) the CONCLUSIVE PRESUMPTIONS and Mr. AAA holds out to the public that Mr. BBB is his agent
(b) the REBUTTABLE PRESUMPTIONS. authorized to sell his car for him. Acting on such statement, Mr.
Actually, there is a third kind of presumption: XXX bought the car and paid Mr. BBB, the agent the sum of
(c) the QUASI-CONCLUSIVE PRESUMPTION. Php750,000.00 as the purchase price of the vehicle.
QUESTION:
CONCLUSIVE PRESUMPTIONS- are inferences which the law Can Mr. AAA later on demand from Mr. XXX the return of the
makes so peremptory that it will not allow them to be overturned car on the ground that Mr. BBB did not have authority to sell the
by any contrary proof however strong. same?
In other words, it is an assertion of a fact that is deemed ANSWER: NO more. Mr. AAA having held out that Mr. BBB
to be true without the need of any further proof. is authorized to sell the vehicle, he can no longer deny his
agent’s authority without depriving the rights of an innocent It is that state of the case which, after all evidence is compared,
party (Mr. XXX) who relied thereon. considered, and weighed, leaves the mind morally certain of the
truth of the accusation.
PRESUMPTION IN FAVOR OF A LANDLORD - arises when a
tenant-landlord/lessor lessee relationship is commenced 2. A CRIMINAL ACT WAS DONE WITH CRIMINAL INTENT.
between two parties. The presumption of criminal intent does not arise from the proof
In such event, the tenant or the lessee is not permitted to of the commission of an act unless the act itself be unlawful.
deny the title of the landlord or lessor to the leased property.
Illustrative Example:
DISPUTABLE PRESUMPTIONS - are those presumptions The act of stabbing is punishable by law and the presumption is
which may be disputed, opposed, refuted or rebutted. the act was done with intent to injure or to kill unless there is
Such presumption continues until overcome by proof to satisfactory proof that the offender is either insane or of
the contrary or by some stronger evidence. unsound mind.

THE FOLLOWING ARE AMONG THE DISPUTABLE 3. EFFECTS OF A VOLUNTARY ACT.

PRESUMPTIONS: The presumption is that a person intends the consequences of a
voluntary act.One who does a criminal wrong is responsible for
1. PRESUMPTION OF INNOCENCE. its consequences, even if another person was injured other than
- The rule is that a person is presumed innocent of the crime the one whom the offender intended to injure.
committed.
To overcome the presumption of innocence, his guilt must be END OF THIRD SESSION
proven beyond reasonable doubt.

WHAT IS “REASONABLE DOUBT?”