LEX LEONUM FRATERNITAS

We do not believe in the power of force used as reason, but in the power of reason used as force.

1968
EVIDENCE MIDTERM EXAMINATIONS
SUGGESTED ANSWERS
1. Distinguish Best Evidence Rule and Parol Evidence Rule
In Best Evidence Rule, generally, when the subject inquiry is the contents of a
document, no evidence shall be admissible other than the original. On Parol
Evidence Rule, generally, when the terms of an agreement have been reduced
in writing, it is considered as containing all the terms agreed upon and there
can be, between the parties and their successors in interest, no evidence of
such terms other than the contents of the written agreement.
2. Differentiate Factum Probans and Factum Probandum
Factum Probans are the intermediate or evidentiary facts or the facts
evidencing the facts / proposition to be established. In other words, the
probative / evidentiary facts tending to prove the fact in issue. On the other
hand, Factum Probandum are ultimate facts or the facts / proposition to be
established. These are the facts by which the factum probandum are to be
established.
3. What is Admission? How about Confession?
Admission refers to the act, declaration or omission of a party as to a relevant
fact may be given in evidence against him. This does not involve an
acknowledgement of guilt. Confession is the declaration of an accused
acknowledging his guilt of the offense charged, or any offense necessarily
included therein, may be given in evidence against him.
4. What is the Quantum of Evidence in (a) Civil Cases; (b) Criminal Cases;
and (c) Administrative Cases?
Quantum of Evidence of required for civil cases is Preponderance of
Evidence. It determines that which is of greater weight or more convincing
than that which is offered in opposition to it.
As for criminal cases, it is Proof Beyond Reasonable Doubt. It is that which
the logical and inevitable result of the evidence on record, exclusive of any
other consideration of the moral certainty of the guilt of the Accused or that
degree of proof which produces conviction in an unprejudiced mind.
In administrative cases, what is required is just substantial evidence. It is that
amount of relevant evidence which a reasonable mind might accept as
adequate to justify a conclusion.

Rivera, John Ray B.

Page 1

LEX LEONUM FRATERNITAS

We do not believe in the power of force used as reason, but in the power of reason used as force.

1968
5. What are the Exceptions to the Res Inter Alios Acta rule? (The examiner
might require you to explain each of the enumerated items, refer back to
your provisions)
a. Admission by a co-partner or agent;
b. Admission by conspirator
c. Admission by privies
d. Admission by silence
e. Interlocking Confession
6. What are the issues that must be put in pleading so that a party may
present evidence to modify, explain or add to the terms of the written
agreement?
a. The failure of the written agreement to express the true intent and
agreement of the parties thereto;
b. An intrinsic ambiguity, mistake or imperfection in the written
agreement;
c. The validity of the written agreement; or
d. The existence of other terms agreed to by the parties or their
successors in interest after the execution of the written agreement
7. Interlocking Confession is when accused persons voluntarily and
independently executed identical confessions without collusion and without
contradiction. This confession may be used as circumstantial or
corroborative evidence.
8. Exceptions to the Best Evidence Rule the following are the exceptions to
the Best Evidence Rule:
a. When the original has been lost or destroyed, or cannot be produced
in court, without bad faith on the part of the offeror;
b. When the original is in the custody or under the control of the party
against whom the evidence is offered, and the latter fails to produce it
after reasonable notice;
c. When the original consists of numerous accounts or other documents
which cannot be examined in court without great loss of time and the
fact sought to be established from them is only the general result of
the whole; and
d. When the original is a public record in the custody of a public officer
or is recorded in a public office.
9. The failure to deny the genuineness and due execution of a document, as in
Section 8, Rule 8, would result to the following:
a. The party whose signature it bears admits that he signs it;
b. That it was signed by another for him with his authority;
Rivera, John Ray B.

Page 2

LEX LEONUM FRATERNITAS

We do not believe in the power of force used as reason, but in the power of reason used as force.

1968
c. At the time it was signed in words and figures, it is exactly the same as
set out in the pleading, and the other party relied on it;
d. That the document is delivered; and
e. The formal requisites of law such as seal, acknowledgment and
revenue stamp, which it lacks are waived by him.
10. Generally, the burden lies upon the prosecution to prove the guilt of the
accused beyond reasonable doubt rather than upon the accused that he was
in fact innocent. If the accused, however, admits killing the victim, but
pleads self-defense, the burden of evidence is shifted to him to prove such
defense by clear, satisfactory and convincing evidence that excludes any
vestige of criminal aggression on his part. To escape liability, it now becomes
incumbent upon the accused to prove by clear and convincing evidence all
the elements of that justifying circumstance.
Take note: An author opined that the burden of proof does not shift as it
remains throughout the trial with the party upon whom it is imposed; the burden of
evidence shifts from party to party depending upon the exigencies of the case in the
course of the trial.
11. During their marriage, neither the husband nor the wife may testify for or
against the other without the consent of the affected spouse, except in a civil
case by one against the other, or in a criminal case for a crime committed by
one against the other or the latters direct descendants or ascendants. (Note:
the provision on Marital Disqualification Rule was provided herein because a
question in the midterm exams will be needing this as a legal anchor)
12. This portion is not mere enumeration, explain the following concepts:
Disqualification by Reason of Mental Incapacity or Immaturity (see
Section 21)
Disqualification by Reason of Marriage (Section 22 or known as the
Marital Disqualification Rule)
Disqualification by Reason of Death or Insanity of Adverse Party
(Section 23, particularly Dead Mans Statute)
Disqualification by Reason of Privilege Communication (Section 24)
13. No, unless the case falls under the exceptions of the Best Evidence Rule, the
Best Evidence in this case is the original document, i.e. the Deed of Absolute
Sale, not the office memorandum. The subject inquiry is the contents of the
document, hence, the best evidence rule shall apply.
14. Dr. Kagaw is allowed to testify as he is considered as expert witness. As to the
wife, she is allowed to testify because it falls under the exceptions of Marital
Rivera, John Ray B.

Page 3

LEX LEONUM FRATERNITAS

We do not believe in the power of force used as reason, but in the power of reason used as force.

1968
Disqualification Rule, that is, a criminal case against the direct descendants of
the other spouse. Lastly, Dr. Bog is allowed to testify because the consultation
on back pains did not amount to advice or treatment, which will need the
professional capacity of Dr. Bog in the physician patient privilege. Hence,
the Court is correct is allowing them to testify.
15. Since the law provides that actions or defenses founded upon a written
instrument, copied in or attached to the corresponding pleading, the
genuineness and due execution of instrument shall be deemed admitted. In
this case, Tambunting Groups failure to specifically deny the fact of
execution and genuineness amounted to an implied admission. If such fact
was presented in Court, this failure to deny will be a judicial admission.
16. The objection must be sustained because as exception to those qualified to
become witness, the Rules of Court provides that no person shall become a
state witness if he is convicted with crime against moral turpitude. Violation
of Batas Pambansa Bilang 22 is now considered as a crime against moral
turpitude. Hence, Napornada is disqualified to become a state witness.
If the case is estafa, Napornada is still disqualified to become a state witness
because estafa is also considered a crime against moral turpitude.
17. The objection must be overruled because a dying declaration may be used as
evidence. It having of the character public that must be made known. In the
case of conspiracy, there may be was a showing that the killer and the
husband conspired; hence, the admission of killer will prejudice or be
admissible against the husband
18. No, because the instrument itself is sufficient to determine the terms of the
agreement among the parties. There being no showing of any issues raised in
a pleading allowing the Trustor to present any parol evidence; hence, it is not
allowed.
19.
a. Objection must be overruled. As this inquires the contents of the
document, it is subject to the presentation of the original.
b. Objection must be overruled. Inquiry on the content of the document
would necessitate the presentation of the original document.
c. Objection must be sustained. The warranty is included as part of the
contents. Therefore, the Best Evidence is the Deed of Absolute Sale.
d. Objection must be sustained. Since, the subject inquiry refers to the
contents of the document, then the Best Evidence is the Deed itself.

Rivera, John Ray B.

Page 4

LEX LEONUM FRATERNITAS

We do not believe in the power of force used as reason, but in the power of reason used as force.

1968
e. Objection must be overruled. The Best Evidence for inquiries of the
contents of the document is the original document. In this case, it is
the Deed of Absolute Sale.
For the Final Examinations: Read, Memorize and Understand by heart Section 40,
Rule132 regarding Proffer of Evidence or Tender of Excluded Evidence.

Rivera, John Ray B.

Page 5