RULE 132 (Sec 37-40)

by Vallestero, Ma. Paula Bianca M.

Section 37. When repetition of objection unnecessary. – When it becomes

reasonably apparent in the course of the examination of a witness that the questions
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 suffi cient for the adverse party to record his or her
continuing objection to such class of questions. (37a)

What is the function of continuing objection?

An objection to the admission of evidence must be made at the proper time and if not so
made it will be understood to have been waived. Professional vigilance is the price of success.
But this proposition has various corollaries. For example, a single objection to a class of
evidence when first offered and an exception to an erroneous ruling admitting it is sufficient, and
neither the objection nor the exception is waived by failure constantly to repeat them when
subsequent offers of the same class of evidence are made. The court may treat the objection as a
continuing one. It is unnecessary when the objection has once been distinctly made further to vex
the court with useless objections and exceptions.1

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
1
Ed A.such
Kellertime
& Co.as
(LTD) vs.give
will Ellerman & Bucknall
the party Steamship
against whomCo.it (LTD) G.R. an
is made No.opportunity
L-12308 to meet the
situation presented by the ruling.

The reason for sustaining or overruling an objection need not be stated. However, if
When can the court make a ruling on the objection?

The ruling of the court on the objection must be given subject to the following rules:

1) Immediately after the objection is made

2) 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.2

What will the court do in making a ruling on the objections?

The Court in making a ruling on the objection may state:

1) The reason for sustaining or overruling an objection need not be stated .

2) 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.3

What is the effect if no ruling is made by the court during trial?

If no ruling is made during the course of the trial, counsel would have no means of
knowing whether or not he would be compelled to meet evidence at all, hence it would prejudice
the substantial rights of his client. 4

2
Ferdinand A. Tan (2021). Evidence; A Compendium for the Bench and the Bar
3
Id.
4
Lopez et al. vs. Valdez, 32 Phil. 644
 The failure of the court to make any ruling should be brought to its attention, failing in
which the case cannot be reopened for a new trial on that ground.5

What is the effect of reservation of a ruling without excluding the evidence?

The reservation of a ruling made by the court on an objection to the admissibility of

evidence, without subsequently excluding the same amounts to denial of said objection. At any
rate, the courts should consider the evidence only for the purpose for which it was offered. 6

Section 39. Striking out [ of ] answer. – 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 question 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. On
proper motion, the court may also order the striking out of answers which are
incompetent, irrelevant, or otherwise improper. (39a)

When can the court order the striking out of the answer of the witness?

Instances where the court shall sustain the objection and may order the striking out of the
answer, as follows, to wit:

1) Should a witness answer the question before the adverse party had the opportunity to
voice fully its objection to the same; or
2) Where the question is not objectionable, but the answer is not responsive, or where a
witness testifies without a question being posed or testifies beyond limits set by the court;
or
3) When the witness does a narration instead of answering the question, and such objection
is found to be meritorious.7
5
People of the Philippines vs. Singh, et al. 45 Phil 676
6
People of the Philippines vs. Abalos, etc., et al. [CA], 58 O.G. 5446
7
Ferdinand A. Tan (2021). Evidence; A Compendium for the Bench and the Bar
Effect of facts stricken out of the record

A fact elicited from a witness during testimony cannot be considered in the disposition of
the case if it has been ordered stricken out, unless it is established by any other evidence on
record.8

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. (40)

Tender of excluded evidence

If the documents of 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.

The rule is that evidence formally offered by a party may be admitted or excluded by the
court. It a party’s offered documentary or object evidence is excluded, he may move or request
that it be attached to form part of the records of the case. If the excluded evidence is oral, he may
state for the record the name and other personal circumstances of the witness and the substance
of the proposed testimony. These procedures are known as offer of proof or tender of excluded
evidence and are made for purposes of appeal. If an adverse judgment is eventually rendered
against the offeror, he may in his appeal assign as error the rejection of the excluded evidence.9

RULE 1323 (Sec 1-2)

Section 1. Preponderance of evidence, how determined. – In civil cases, the

party having the burden of proof must establish his or her case by a preponderance
of evidence. In determining where the preponderance or superior weight of
8
Metropolitan Bank and Trust Company vs. Custodio, G.R. No. 173780, March 21, 2011
9 evidence on the issues involved lies, the court may consider all the facts and
Fortune Tobacco Corporation vs. CIR, G.R. No. 192024, July 1, 2015
circumstances of the case, the witnesses’ manner of testifying, their intelligence,
their means and opportunity of knowing the facts to which they are testifying, the
nature of the facts to which they testify, the probability or improbability of their
What is preponderance of evidence?

Preponderance of evidence is the weight, credit, and value of the aggregate evidence on
either side and is usually considered to be synonymous with the term “greater weight of the
evidence” or “greater weight of the credible evidence.” Preponderance of evidence is a phrase
that, in last analysis, means probability of the truth. It is evidence that is more convincing to the
court as it is worthier of belief than that which is offered in opposition thereto.10

Characteristic of preponderance of evidence

Preponderance of evidence is meant that the evidence as a whole adduced by one side is
11
superior to that of the other. In addition, the plaintiff must rely on the strength of his own
evidence and not upon the weakness of the defendants. 12

Burden of proof

In civil cases, the party having the burden of proof must establish his case by
preponderance of evidence which means probability of the truth.13

Factors to be considered in determining preponderance of evidence

1) All the facts and circumstances of the case;

2) The witnesses’ manner of testifying;
3) Their intelligence;
4) Their means and opportunity of knowing the facts to which they are testifying;
5) The nature of the facts to which they testify;
6) The probability or improbability of their testimony;
7) Their interest or want of interests; and
8) Also their personal credibility so far as the same may legitimately appear upon the trial;
9) The court may also consider the number of witnesses, though the preponderance is not
necessarily with the greater number.14

Effect if the party fails to establish the case by preponderance of evidence

10
Tomas Tan vs. Jose Hosana, G.R. No. 190846, February 3, 2016
11
Raymundo vs. Lunaria
12
BJDC Construction vs. Nena Lanuzo, et al., G.R. No. 161151, March 24, 2014
13
Tomani vs. Salvador, G.R. No. 171497, April 4, 2011
14
Ferdinand A. Tan (2021). Evidence; A Compendium for the Bench and the Bar
 In civil cases, if the plaintiff was not able to prove his claim by preponderance of
evidence, the defendant may file a demurrer to evidence based on insufficiency of evidence.15

Section 2. Proof beyond reasonable doubt. – In a criminal case, the accused is

entitled to an acquittal, unless his or her guilt is shown beyond reasonable doubt.
Proof beyond reasonable doubt does not mean such a degree of proof as, excluding
possibility of error, produces absolute certainty. Moral certainty only is required, or
that degree of proof which produces conviction in an unprejudiced mind. (2a)

Source of the quantum of proof beyond reasonable doubt

The quantum of proof beyond reasonable doubt springs from no less than the Bill of
Rights, which recognizes every person’s right to be presumed innocent until proven
otherwise. Proof beyond reasonable doubt does not require absolute certainty; rather it
calls for moral certainty since “the conscience must be satisfied that the accused is
responsible for the offense charged.”16

Meaning of proof beyond reasonable doubt

Every conviction for a crime should only be handed down after proof beyond reasonable
doubt of the guilt of the accused for the crime charged has been adduced. “Proof beyond
reasonable doubt does not mean such a degree of proof as, excluding possibility of error,
produces absolute certainty. Moral certainty only is required, or that degree of proof which
produces conviction in an unprejudiced mind.”17

Requirements to overcome the presumption of guiltlessness

In order to overcome the presumption of guiltlessness, it must pass the test of relevancy
and competency in accordance with Sec. 3, Rule 128 of the Rules of Court. 18

15
Nenita Gonzales, et al. vs. Mariano Bugaay and Lucy Bugaay, G.R. No. 173008, February 22, 2012
16
Ricardo Veriño y Pingol vs. People of the Philippines, G.R. No. 225710, June 19, 2019
17
Leonardo Casona vs. People of the Philippines, G.R. No. 179757, September 13, 2017
18
BSB Group, Inc. represented by its President, Mr. Ricardo Bangayan vs. Sally Go aka Sally Go-Bangayan, G.R. No.
168644, February 16, 2010