Scribd
Upload
61 views

Evidence: Rules of Court RULE 128 - 134

1. Evidence is required in judicial proceedings where there are questions of fact to be resolved. It is not required where the issue is purely a question of law. 2. Evidence is also not required if the parties agree on the facts, or if the facts are matters of judicial notice or have been judicially admitted. 3. The rules of evidence apply specifically to judicial proceedings but may be applied analogously to some administrative proceedings depending on the circumstances. Technical rules are generally not required in administrative cases.

Uploaded by

Ram Rael Villar
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
Available Formats
Download as PPTX, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
61 views

Evidence: Rules of Court RULE 128 - 134

1. Evidence is required in judicial proceedings where there are questions of fact to be resolved. It is not required where the issue is purely a question of law. 2. Evidence is also not required if the parties agree on the facts, or if the facts are matters of judicial notice or have been judicially admitted. 3. The rules of evidence apply specifically to judicial proceedings but may be applied analogously to some administrative proceedings depending on the circumstances. Technical rules are generally not required in administrative cases.

Uploaded by

Ram Rael Villar
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
Available Formats
Download as PPTX, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
You are on page 1/ 22

EVIDENCE

RULES OF COURT
RULE 128 -134
Concept of Evidence
• Evidence, in its broadest sense, refers to “any
matter of fact, the effect, tendency or design of
which is to produce in the mind a persuasive
affirmative or disaffirmative of the existence of
some other matter of fact.”

• “Judicial evidence is the means, sanctioned by


law, of ascertaining in a judicial proceeding, the
truth respecting a question of fact”
• Rule 128, Sec.1 of the Rules of Court would
define Evidence as “the means, sanctioned
by these rules, of ascertaining in a judicial
proceeding the truth respecting a matter
of fact.”

• The very tenor of the definition clearly indicates


that not every fact having a conceivable
connection to the issue of a case or that which
provides a reasonable inference as to the truth or
falsity of a matter alleged, is considered
evidence.
• It is not evidence if it is excluded by law or by the
Rules even if it proves the existence or non-
existence of a fact in issue.
• Thus, a hearsay evidence, a coerced extrajudicial
confession of the accused, and an evidence
obtained in violation of constitutional rights,
even if ultimately shown to correspond to the
truth, do not fall within the definition of Sec. 1
Rule 128.
• The definition, provided for under Sec.1 of Rule
128, significantly considers “evidence ” not as an
end in itself but merely as a “means” of
ascertaining the truth of a matter of fact.
• Equally significant is the observation that
“evidence” as defined in the Rules of Court is a
means of ascertaining the truth not in all types of
proceedings, but specifically, in a “Judicial
proceeding.”

• The purpose of evidence under the rules of court


is to ascertain the truth respecting a matter of
fact in a judicial proceeding. (Sec. 1 Rule 128,
Rules of Court).

• Litigation cannot be properly resolved by


suppositions, or even presumption, with no basis
in evidence.
• The truth must have to be determined by
the rules for admissibility and proof.

• Evidence is required because the


presumption that the court is not aware of
the veracity of the facts involved in the
case.

• Ergo, incumbent upon the parties to prove


a fact in issue through the presentation of
admissible evidence.
• The rules of evidence are merely the means for
ascertaining the truth respecting a matter of fact.

• While the purpose of evidence is to know the


truth, the truth referred to in the definition is
not necessarily the actual truth but one aptly
referred to as the judicial or legal truth.

• The limitation of human judicial systems cannot


always guarantee knowledge of the actual or real
truth.
• Actual truth may not always be achieved in
judicial proceedings because the findings of the
court would depend on the evidence presented
before it based on the accepted rules for
admissibility.

• Under Sec. 34 of Rule 132, Courts, as a rule, are


not even authorized to consider evidence which
has not been formally offered.

• Thus, a supposed evidence that would


undoubtedly show the innocence of the accused
will not be considered in the decision of the
court if not formally offered in evidence.
• If it is evidence to the contrary that has
been formally offered, it is the latter which
the court is bound to consider or
appreciate.

• While it may be the actual truth that it was


Mr. X who shot Mr. Y, if the available
evidence presented and admitted in court
points to Mr. Z as the culprit, then the
judicial or legal truth is that it was Mr. Z,
not Mr. X, who shot Mr. Y.
Scope and applicability of the rules of
evidence
• The rules on evidence in the Rules of Court are
guided by the principles of uniformity.

• As a general policy, the rules on evidence shall


be the same in all courts and in all trials and
hearings. (Sec. 2, Rule 128, Rules of Court).

• The rules on Evidence, being components of the


Rules of Court, apply only to judicial
proceedings. (Sec. 1, Rule 128, Rules of Court)
• Significantly, Sec. 4 of the Rule 1 provides
for the non-applicability of the Rules of
Court, including necessarily the rules on
evidence, to certain specific proceedings.

• SEC. 4. In what cases not applicable-


These Rules shall not apply to election
cases, land registration, cadastral,
naturalization, and insolvency
proceedings, and other cases not herein
provided for, except by analogy or in
suppletory character and whenever
practicable and convenient.
• The general rule is that administrative
agencies are not bound by the technical
rules of evidence.

• It can accept documents which cannot be


admitted in a judicial proceeding where
the Rule of Court are strictly observed.

• It can choose to give weight or disregard


such evidence, depending on its
trustworthiness.
• Technical Rules of procedure and evidence
are not strictly applied in administrative
cases and administrative due process
cannot be fully equated with due process
in strict judicial terms.

• It has also been ruled that a reliance on


the technical rules of evidence in labor
cases is misplaced.
• Hence, the application of the concept of
judicial admissions in such cases would be
to exact compliance with technicalities of
law that is contrary to the demands of
substantial justice.
When evidence is required; when not
required
1. Evidence is the means of providing a fact.

• As the definition says, it is offered in court to


ascertain the truth “respecting a matter of fact.”

• Implied from the definition of “evidence” in


sec. 1 rule 128 is the need for the introduction
of evidence when the court has to resolve a
question of fact.
• Where no factual issue exists in case, there is
no need to present evidence because where
the case presents a question of law, such
question is resolved by the mere application
of the relevant statutes or rules of this
jurisdiction to which no evidence is required

• In the Philippine judicial system, there is a


mandatory judicial notice of the official acts
of the legislature ( sec. 1, rule 129, Rule of
Court) and these acts cover statutes.
2. When the pleading in a civil case do not
tender an issue of fact, a trial need not be
conducted since there is no more reason to
present evidence. The case is then ripe for
judicial determination through a
judgement on the pleadings pursuant to
Rule 34 of the Rules of Court.

3.Presentation of evidence may likewise be


dispensed with by the agreement of the
parties.
• The parties to any action are allowed by
the Rules to agree in writing upon the
facts involved in the litigation and submit
the case for a judgement upon the facts
agreed upon, without the introduction of
evidence. (sec. 6, Rule 30, Rules of Court)

4. Evidence is not also required on matters


of judicial notice. (Sec. 1, Rule 129, Rules
of Court) and on matters judicially
admitted (sec.4, rule 129, Rules of Court)
• Evidence is not also required when a law
or rule presumes the truth of a fact.

• When, for instance, an injured passenger


sues a common carrier for breach of
contract of carriage, evidence of the
negligence of the defendant carrier is
dispensed with
• This is because art. 1756 of the Civil Code of the
Philippines establishes the presumption that, “In
case of death of or injuries to passenger,
common carrier are presumed to have been at
fault or to have acted negligently.”

• The same presumption applies under Art 1735 of


the same code when the goods on board a
common carrier are lost, destroyed or
deteriorated.
Application of the Rules on Electronic
Evidence
• The
•Is evidence always
required in all
judicial
proceeding prior
judgement?

You might also like