On
evidence scope
Evidence



Scope









Scope
The rules of evidence shall be the same in all courts and in all
trials and hearings, except as otherwise provided by law or these
rules.

Classification of Evidence According to Form
1. Objective or Real Evidence
   directly addressed to the senses of the court and consist of
   tangible things exhibited or demonstrated in open court, in an
   ocular inspection, or at place designated by the court for its
   view or observation of an exhibition, experiment or demonstration.
   This is referred to as autoptic preference.
2. Documentary Evidence
   evidence supplied by written instruments or derived from
   conventional symbols, such as letters, by which ideas are
   represented on material substances.
3. Testimonial Evidence
   is that which is submitted to the court through the testimony or
   deposition of a witness.

Relevant Evidence 
evidence having any value in reason as tending to prove any matter
provable in an action. The test is the logical relation of the
evidentiary fact to the fact in issue, whether the former tends to
establish the probability or improbability of the latter.

Material Evidence
evidence directed to prove a fact in issue as determined by the rules
of substantive law and pleadings. The test is whether the fact it
intends to prove is an issue or not. AS to whether a fact is in issue
or not is in turn determined by the substantive law, the pleadings,
the pre-trial order and by the admissions or confessions on file.
Consequently, evidence may be relevant but may be immaterial in the
case.

Competent Evidence
one that is not excluded by this Rules, a stature or the Constitution.

Direct Evidence
that which proves the fact in dispute without the aid of any
inference or presumption.

Circumstantial Evidence
is the proof of a fact or facts from which taken either singly or
collectively, the existence or a particular fact in dispute may be
inferred as a necessary or probable consequence.

Cumulative Evidence
evidence of the same kind and to the same state of facts.

Corroborative Evidence
is additional evidence of a difference character to the same point.

Prima Facie Evidence
that which is standing alone, unexplained or uncontradicted, is
sufficient to maintain the proposition affirmed.

Conclusive Evidence
the class of evidence which the law does not allow to be contradicted.

Primary Evidence
that which the law regards as affording the greatest certainty of the
fact in question. Also referred to as the best evidence.

Secondary Evidence
that which is inferior to the primary evidence and is permitted by
law only when the best evidence is not available. Known as the
substitutionary evidence.

Positive Evidence
when the witness affirms that a fact did or did not occur. Entitled
to a greater weight since the witness represents of his personal
knowledge the presence or absence of a fact.

Negative Evidence
when the witness did not see or know of the occurrence of a fact.
There is a total disclaimer of persona knowledge, hence without any
representation or disavowal that the fact in question could or could
not have existed or happened. It is admissible only if it tends to
contradict positive evidence of the other side or would tend to
exclude the existence of fact sworn to by the other side.

What do the rules of evidence determine?
All rights and liabilities are dependent upon and arise out of facts.

Every judicial proceeding whatever has for its purpose the ascertaining
of some right or liability. If the proceeding is Criminal, the object
is to ascertain the liability to punishment of the person accused.
If the proceeding is Civil, the object is to ascertain some right of
property or status, or the right of one party and the liability of
other to some form of relief.

Two branches of the law of procedure
1. The law of the pleadings which determines the questions in a
   dispute between the parties
2. The law of evidence, which determines how the party can convince
   the court of the existence of facts which according to the provisions
   of substantive law, would establish the existence of the right or
   liability which they allege to exist.

Why should the rule of evidence be uniform?
1. The relation between the evidentiary fact and a particular proposition
   is always the same, without regard to the kind of litigation in which
   that proposition becomes material to be proved.
2. If the rules of evidence prescribe the best course to arrive at the
   truth, that must be and are the same in all civilized countries.

Differences in the Rules of Evidence in Criminal and Civil Cases
1. Criminal Cases
   The accused attends by compulsion

   Civil Cases
   Parties attend by accord

2. Criminal Cases
   Presumption of innocence attends the accused throughout the trial
   until the same has been overcome by prima facie evidence of his
   guilt.

   Civil Cases
   There is no presumption as to either party.

3. Criminal Cases
   It is an implied admission of guilt.

   Civil Cases
   An offer to compromise does not as a general rule amount to an
   admission of liability.

4. Criminal Cases
   Guilt beyond reasonable doubt

   Civil Cases
   Must prove by preponderance of evidence: Reason is that there is
   no presumption and due to the fact that the proof will only result
   in a judgment of pecuniary damages or establish Civil Right.

Any evidence inadmissible according to the laws in force at the time
the action accrued, but admissible according to the laws in force at
the time of the trial, is receivable. There is no vested right of
property in rules of evidence.

      Reason: The rules of evidence are merely methods for
      ascertaining facts. It must be supposed that change of law
      merely makes it more likely that the fact will be truly
      ascertained, either by admitting evidence whose former
      suppression or by suppressing evidence helped to conceal the
      truth.

There are rules of evidence established merely for the protection of
the parties. If according to the well-established doctrine, the
parties may waive such rules during the trial of a case, there is no
reason why they cannot make the waiver in a contract. However, if the
rule of evidence waived by the parties has been established by law on
grounds of public policy, the waiver is void.