Documente Academic
Documente Profesional
Documente Cultură
Ferdinand Tan)
Evidence
Rule 131: Burden of Proof and Presumptions
I.
-
Burden of Evidence
- The duty of the party
- To go forward with the evidence
- To overthrow the prima facie evidence
against him. (Riano, Evidence, p. 408)
Distinctions between Burden of Proof
and
Burden of Evidence:
a. As to whether such burden shifts from one
party to another:
- Burden Of Proof does not shift because it
remains with the party upon whom it is
imposed; Burden Of Evidence shifts from
party to party depending on the exigencies
of the case.
b. As to how it is determined:
- Burden of proof is determined by the
pleadings filed by the party; while burden of
evidence is determined by the developments
at the trial, or by the provisions of the
substantive law or procedural rules.
Note: Do not be confused with burden of proof and
quantum of evidence. Quantum of evidence is a
different matter. It is the weight of evidence. While
burden of proof is the duty to present evidence to
prove his case according to the quantum of evidence
required.
Burden of Proof in Different Cases: (Be ready with
definition of terms)
1. In illegal dismissal employer has the burden
of proving that the dismissal is legal.
2. In payment of backwages it is the employee
that has the burden of proving that he is
entitled.
b. Rebuttable Presumption
A presumption that may be contradicted or
overcome by other evidence.
a. Presumption of law
An assumption which the law requires to be
made from a set of facts.
b. Presumption of fact
- An assumption made from the facts without
any direction or positive requirement of a
law.
Conclusive Presumptions under the Rules of
Court:
(Note: These presumptions are based on the
principle of estoppel under the Civil Code. The 2
presumptions are kinds of estoppel in pais)
A. Whenever a party has, by his own declaration, act,
or omission, intentionally and deliberately led to
another to believe a particular thing true, and to act
upon such belief, he cannot, in any litigation arising
out of such declaration, act or omission, be permitted
to falsify it:
B. The tenant is not permitted to deny the title of his
landlord at the time of commencement of the relation
of landlord and tenant between them.
Disputable Presumptions under the Rules of
Court
Notes:
1. Just
substantially
memorize
the
disputable presumptions under Rule 131,
Section 3. There are 37 disputable
presumptions under Section 3.
2. If you are asked as to what quantum of
evidence is needed to overthrow a
disputable presumption, it is by CLEAR
AND CONVINCING EVIDENCE. The only
exception here is that a person is innocent of
a crime.
RULE 132: Presentation of Evidence
Witness
I.
-
How is he examined?
It shall be done in open court
Under oath or affirmation
Examined orally, unless the witness is
incapacitated to speak or the question calls
for a different answer.
General Rule:
It is not allowed.
Exceptions:
(a) On cross examination;
(b) On preliminary matters;
(c) When there is a difficulty is getting direct
and intelligible answers from a witness who
is ignorant, or a child of tender years, or is of
feeble mind, or a deaf-mute;
(d) Of an unwilling or hostile witness; or
(e) Of a witness who is an adverse party or an
officer, director, or managing agent of a public
or private corporation or of a partnership or
association which is an adverse party.
Misleading Question
A question that assumes as true a fact not yet
testified to by the witness, or
Contrary to that which he has previously
stated.
It is not allowed.
VIII.
Impeachment of a Witness
Notes:
1. Determine whether you are impeaching as an
adverse party or as a party who presented the
witness.
2. Distinguish the concept of laying the basis
and laying the predicate. Laying the
basis is a principle followed to present
secondary evidence in order for such kind of
evidence to be admitted by the court, as an
exception to the Best Evidence Rule. On the
other hand, laying the predicate is a
principle followed in impeaching a witness by
evidence of inconsistent statements, as per
Rule 130, Section 13.
A. Impeachment
Witness
of
an
Adverse
Partys
a. Contradictory evidence
b. Evidence that his general reputation for
truth, honesty, and integrity is bad
c. Evidence that he has made at other times
statements inconsistent with his present
testimony. (Inconsistent statements)
Notes:
1. The bad reputation, in impeaching a witness,
should refer only to the truth, honesty, or
integrity of his reputation. Example is that he
was once guilty of perjury.
2. There is no impeachment by evidence of bad
character; only bad reputation. (Rule 132,
Sections 12 and 14, in relation to Rule 130,
Section 51 c)
3. Doctrine of Laying the Predicate; How
made: (Rule 132, Section 13)
a. The statement must be related to him
b. The circumstances of the times and places
and the persons present must also be
related to him.
c. Ask the witness whether he made such
statement.
d. If so, allow the witness to explain them.
e. If the statements be in writing, they must
be shown to the witness before any
question is put to him concerning them.
4. A witness cannot be impeached by evidence
of particular wrongful acts except evidence of
his final conviction of an offense as disclosed
by his examination or by the record of
judgment. (Riano, p. 324)
B. Impeachment of Own Witness
General Rule: it is not allowed.
Exceptions:
1. Unwilling or hostile witness
2. A witness who is an adverse party.
DOCUMENTS
I. Classes of Documents
A. Public documents
a) The written official acts, or records of the official
acts of the sovereign authority, official bodies and
tribunals, and public officers, whether of the
Philippines, or of a foreign country;
Notes: