Admissibility of Evidence
On Evidence
Admissibility of Evidence
2 Axioms of Admissibility
1. None but facts having rational probative value are admissible.
2. All facts having rational probative value are admissible unless some specific rule forbids their admission.
The Admissibility of Evidence is Determined at the Time it is Offered to the Court.
Heirs of Sabanpan v. Comorposa (2003)
1. None but facts having rational probative value are admissible.
2. All facts having rational probative value are admissible unless some specific rule forbids their admission.
The Admissibility of Evidence is Determined at the Time it is Offered to the Court.
Heirs of Sabanpan v. Comorposa (2003)
The admissibility of evidence should not be confused with its probative value.
Admissibility refers to the question of whether certain pieces of evidence are to be considered at all, while probative value refers to the question of whether the admitted evidence proves an issue.
Thus, a particular item of evidence may be admissible, but its evidentiary weight depends on judicial evaluation within the guidelines provided by the rules of evidence
Every objection to the admissibility of evidence shall be made at the time such evidence is offered or as soon thereafter as the objection to its admissibility shall have become apparent; otherwise, the objection shall be considered waived.
Certain Doctrines or Rules of Admissibility
1. Conditional admissibility
Every objection to the admissibility of evidence shall be made at the time such evidence is offered or as soon thereafter as the objection to its admissibility shall have become apparent; otherwise, the objection shall be considered waived.
Certain Doctrines or Rules of Admissibility
1. Conditional admissibility
Where the evidence at the time of its offer appears to be immaterial or irrelevant unless it is connected with the other facts to be subsequently proved, such evidence may be received on condition that the other facts will be proved thereafter; otherwise, the evidence given will be stricken out. This is subject to the qualification that there should be no bad faith on the part of the proponent.
2. Multiple admissibility
2. Multiple admissibility
Where the evidence is relevant and competent for two or more purposes, Such evidence should be admitted for any or all the purposes for which it is offered, provided it satisfies all the requirements of law for its admissibility therefore.
3. Curative admissibility
3. Curative admissibility
This treats upon the right of the party to introduce incompetent evidence in his behalf where the court has admitted the same kind of evidence adduced by the adverse party.
Three theories on curative admissibility:
1. American rule – the admission of such incompetent evidence, without objection by the opponent, does not justify such opponent in rebutting it by similar incompetent evidence.
2. English rule: if a party has presented inadmissible evidence, the adverse party may resort to similar inadmissible evidence.
3. Massachusetts rule – the adverse party may be permitted to introduce similar incompetent evidence in order to avoid a plain and unfair prejudice caused by the admission of the other party’s evidence.
Three theories on curative admissibility:
1. American rule – the admission of such incompetent evidence, without objection by the opponent, does not justify such opponent in rebutting it by similar incompetent evidence.
2. English rule: if a party has presented inadmissible evidence, the adverse party may resort to similar inadmissible evidence.
3. Massachusetts rule – the adverse party may be permitted to introduce similar incompetent evidence in order to avoid a plain and unfair prejudice caused by the admission of the other party’s evidence.
Bigwas
Bigwas blog about Criminal law and Procedure, Criminology and Crimes, Philippine Banking and Finance, Insurance and Investment.