Digests in Evidence Rule 128 129 130

7/23/2019 Digests in Evidence Rule 128 129 130

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/digests-in-evidence-rule-128-129-130 1/12



→ fai%re to his other na)e in 1// etition

o a co: of the 1/77 etition %ed with the Co))ittee was anneFed to the

&tate’s ae%%ant 'rief, in which etitioner stated that in addition to his na)e

of +n* Chia, he had %i6ewise 'een 6nown since chi%dhood as oreto Chia

+n*?

→ fai%re to state a%% his for)er %aces of residence in vio%ation of C.A. No. 475, H7

o as shown ': etitionerIs <))i*rant Certicate of Residence, etitioner resided

at .M. #asa &treet, <%oi%o, 't he did not inc%de said address in the etition

→ fai%re to condct hi)se%f in a roer and irreroacha'%e )anner drin* his entire sta:

in the Phi%iines, in vio%ation of H2

o etitioner acta%%: %ived with his wife withot the 'enet of )arria*e fro) 1/J5

nti% the: were )arried in 1/77

o etitioner fai%ed to resent his 1/J5 )arria*e contract, if there 'e an:

→ havin* no 6nown %crative trade or occation and his revios inco)es have 'een

inscient or )isdec%ared, a%so in contravention of H2

o inco)e taF retrns a%%e*ed%: %ed ': etitioner fro) 1/75 to 1/77 to show that

his net inco)e co%d hard%: sort hi)se%f and his fa)i%:

fa!ure to su""ort hs "etton #th the a""ro"rate do$u%entar&e'den$e

• CA reversed the decision of the tria% cort.

• @ence, this etition.

Pettoner(s $ontenton: !he ae%%ate cort erred in considerin* the doc)ents which

had )ere%: 'een anneFed ': the &tate to its ae%%antIs 'rief and, on the 'asis of which,

Bstied the reversa% of the tria% cortIs decision. Not ha'n) *een "resented andfor%a!!& o+ered as e'den$e, the& are %ere -s$ra"s/ of "a"er de'od of an&e'dentar& 'a!ue,- so t #as ar)ued, *e$ause under Ru!e 012, 13 of the Re'sedRu!es on E'den$e, the $ourt sha!! $onsder no e'den$e #h$h has not *eenfor%a!!& o+ered.

ISSUE: hether etitioner’s contention is tena'%e.

HEL4: NO. !he &C fond the contention to have no )erit.



(1) Naturalization; Evidence; Pleadings and Practice; Formal Ofer o Evidence.The ru!e on for%a! o+er of e'den$e s $!ear!& not a""!$a*!e to a "etton fornatura!5aton6 4e$sons n natura!5aton "ro$eedn)s are not $o'ered *& the ru!eon res judicata

Petitioner fai%ed to note R%e 145 of the R%es of Cort which rovides that the r%es

sha%% not a%: to %and re*istration, cadastra% and e%ection cases, naturalization and

inso%venc: roceedin*s, and other cases not herein rovided for, eFcet ': ana%o*: or in a

s%etor: character and whenever ractica'%e and convenient.

!he r%e on for)a% oKer of evidence R%e 152, H54 invo6ed ': etitioner is c%ear%: not

a%ica'%e to the resent case invo%vin* a etition for natra%i-ation. !he on%: instance when

said r%es )a: 'e a%ied ': ana%o*: or s%etori%: in sch cases is when it is ractica'%e

and convenient. !hat is not the case here, since re%iance on the doc)ents resented ':

the &tate for the rst ti)e on aea%, in fact, aears to 'e the )ore ractica% and

convenient corse of action considerin* that decisions in natra%i-ation roceedin*s are notcovered ': the r%e on res judicata. Conse9ent%:, a na% favora'%e Bd*)ent does not

rec%de the &tate fro) %ater on )ovin* for a revocation of the *rant of natra%i-ation on the

'asis of the sa)e doc)ents.

(2) Same; Same The reason for the ru!e "roh*tn) the ad%sson of e'den$e#h$h has not *een for%a!!& o+ered s to a+ord the o""oste "art& the $han$e too*7e$t to ther ad%ss*!t&.

Petitioner cannot c%ai) that, as a res%t of the &tate’s fai%re to resent and for)a%%: oKer its

doc)entar: evidence, he was denied the ri*ht to o'Bect a*ainst their athenticit:, ths,

derivin* hi) of his fnda)enta% ri*ht to rocedra% de rocess. <ndeed, the reason for ther%e rohi'itin* the ad)ission of evidence which has not 'een for)a%%: oKered is to aKord

the oosite art: the chance to o'Bect to their ad)issi'i%it:. Petitioner cannot c%ai) that he

was derived of the ri*ht to o'Bect to the athenticit: of the doc)ents s')itted to the

ae%%ate cort ': the &tate.

(!) Same; Same; Pu*!$ 4o$u%ents. 8here a "art& fa!s to %a9e a satsfa$tor&sho#n) of an& a# or rre)u!art& that %a& $ast dou*t on the authent$t& of do$u%ents #h$h ha'e *een e;e$uted under oath, the $ourt %a& re!& on the%.

!he Cort notes that the doc)ents L na)e%:, the etition in &CN Case No. 05177,

etitionerIs )arria*e contract, the Boint adavit eFected ': hi) and his wife, and

etitionerIs inco)e taF retrns L are a%% '%ic doc)ents. As sch, the: have 'een

eFected nder oath. !he: are ths re%ia'%e. &ince etitioner fai%ed to )a6e a satisfactor:

showin* of an: aw or irre*%arit: that )a: cast do't on the athenticit: of these

doc)ents, it is in the conc%sion of the &C that the ae%%ate cort did not err in re%:in*

on the).



4s"oston: 8ecision of the CA A33<RM8; instant etition 8N<8.

CASE No. 3

CECILIA <ULUETA vs. COURT OF APPEALS and ALFRE4O =ARTING.R. No. 0>?1@16 Fe*ruar& 2>, 0

Nature of the Case: Petition to review the decision of the CA ar)in* the decision of theR!C of Mani%a #ranch O which ordered etitioner to retrn doc)ents and aers ta6en ':her fro) rivate resondentIs c%inic withot the %atterIs 6now%ed*e and consent.

FACTS• Petitioner Ceci%ia %eta is the wife of rivate resondent A%fredo Martin.

• +n March 2, 1/2, etitioner entered the c%inic of her hs'and, a doctor of )edicine, and in the resence of her )other, a driver and rivate resondentIssecretar:, forci'%: oened the drawers and ca'inet in her hs'andIs c%inic and too6

1J7 doc)ents consistin* of rivate corresondence 'etween 8r. Martin and hisa%%e*ed ara)ors, *reetin*s cards, cance%%ed chec6s, diaries, 8r. MartinIs assort,and hoto*rahs.

• !he doc)ents and aers were sei-ed for se in evidence in a case for %e*a%searation and for dis9a%ication fro) the ractice of )edicine which etitioner had%ed a*ainst her hs'and.

• 8r. Martin 'ro*ht this action 'e%ow for recover: of the doc)ents and aers andfor da)a*es a*ainst etitioner.

• !he R!C r%ed in favor of 8r. A%fredo Martin, dec%arin* hi) the caita%=eFc%siveowner of the roerties descri'ed in ara*rah 5 of %aintiKIs Co)%aint or thosefrther descri'ed in the Motion to Retrn and &ress and orderin* Ceci%ia %etaand an: erson actin* in her 'eha%f to a i))ediate%: retrn the roerties to 8r.Martin and to a: hi) certain a)ont inc%din* no)ina% and )ora% da)a*es.

• !he writ of re%i)inar: inBnction ear%ier issed was )ade na% and etitioner Ceci%ia%eta and her attorne:s and reresentatives were enBoined fro) sin* ors')ittin*=ad)ittin* as evidence the doc)ents and aers in 9estion.

• +n aea%, the CA ar)ed the R!C’s decision

@ence this etition.

ISSUE: hether the doc)ents and aers, so forci'%:=i%%e*a%%: ta6en or sei-ed ': the wifefro) and withot the consent of her hs'and as the caita% owner of the sa)e, aread)issi'%e in evidence in a case of %e*a% searation to which the: are arties.

HEL4: NO.

(1) "llegall# o$tained evidence; %onstitutional &a'; Privac# o communication and %orresondence; Privac# o %ommunication and %orresondence is inviola$le Theon!& e;$e"ton n the Consttuton s f there s a !a#fu! order fro% aD $ourt or#hen "u*!$ safet& or order reures other#se, as "res$r*ed *& !a#. D <ndeed thedoc)ents and aers in 9estion are inad)issi'%e in evidence. !he constittiona%inBnction dec%arin* the rivac: of co))nication and corresondence "to 'e( invio%a'%e isno %ess a%ica'%e si)%: 'ecase it is the wife who thin6s herse%f a**rieved ': herhs'andIs inde%it: who is the art: a*ainst who) the constittiona% rovision is to 'eenforced. !he on%: eFcetion to the rohi'ition in the Constittion is if there is a %awf%

http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri1996/feb1996/gr_107383_1996.html#fnt2






order "fro) a( cort or when '%ic safet: or order re9ires otherwise, as rescri'ed ':%aw. An: vio%ation of this rovision renders the evidence o'tained inad)issi'%e for an:rose in an: roceedin*.

2/ !he inti)acies 'etween hs'and and wife do not Bstif: an: one of the) in 'rea6in* thedrawers and ca'inets of the other and in ransac6in* the) for an: te%%ta%e evidence of )arita%

inde%it:, as in the instant case. A "erson, *& $ontra$tn) %arra)e, does not shedhsher nte)rt& or hs r)ht to "r'a$& as an nd'dua! and the $onsttutona!"rote$ton s e'er a'a!a*!e to h% or to her.

1/ The !a# nsures a*so!ute freedo% of $o%%un$aton *et#een the s"ouses *&%a9n) t "r'!e)ed. Neither hs'and nor wife )a: testif: for or a*ainst the other withotthe consent of the aKected sose whi%e the )arria*e s'sists. Neither )a: 'e eFa)inedwithot the consent of the other as to an: co))nication received in condence ': onefro) the other drin* the )arria*e, save for secied eFcetions. #t one thin* is freedo)of co))nication; 9ite another is a co)%sion for each one to share what one 6nows withthe other. And this has nothin* to do with the dt: of de%it: that each owes to the other.

4s"oston: Petition for review 8N<8 for %ac6 of )erit.

CASE No.

PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES %aintiKQae%%ee vs. OEL SARTAGO4A & BOCANEGRA, I== BASCUA & LA<ARTE, JICENTE STA. ANA & GUTIERRE< and OHN 4OE,accsedQae%%ants.

G.R. No. ?K2K6 A"r! ?, 01

FACTS

• A%% the three accsedQae%%ants were convicted ': the !ria% Cort as the %atter fond

a%% *i%t: 'e:ond reasona'%e do't as coQrincia%s of the cri)e of Ro''er: with

Rae, and each sentenced to sKer the ena%t: of Reclusion Perpetua with the

accessories rovided for ': the %aw.

• +n aea%E

→ !he accsedQae%%ants fa%t the tria% cort of i*norin* the n*errint

eFa)ination reort s')itted ': the Cri)e a'orator: of the PC=<NP Ca)

Cra)e which stated that none of the seci)en %atent n*errints were fondto 'e ositive.

o <t is their contention that since their n*errints were not fond in the

o'Bects fond in the scene of the cri)e the: cannot 'e he%d *i%t: of

the cri)e char*ed 'e:ond reasona'%e do't.



→ !he: c%ai) that the fact that icente &ta. Ana and i)): #ascSa did not ee,

even when the: had a%% the oortnities to do so, rove their innocence.

→ hen the: were a%%owed to *o ho)e after i%)a fai%ed to identif: the) drin*

the rst confrontation at the o%ice station, the: sta:ed ho)e and did not ee

nti% the: were a*ain re9ired to aear at the o%ice station for the secondti)e. !he accsedQae%%ants in eKect osit that if i*ht is an indication of

*i%t, nonQi*ht or the decision not to ee, havin* the oortnit: to do so, is

a si*n of innocence.

ISSUE 0/: 8hether the a*sen$e of n)er"rnts as a$$usedMa""e!!ants "osted,e!%nates "oss*!t& that a$$used $ou!d ha'e *een at the $r%e s$ene.

HEL4: NO. !he &C a*rees that a ositive ndin* of )atchin* n*errints has *reat

si*nicance, however, it cannot sstain their accsedQae%%ants theor: that fro) the

ne*ative ndin*s in the n*errint eFa)ination condcted in the corse of the investi*ation

in the instant case, it )st 'e conc%ded that the: co%d not have 'een at the scene of the

cri)e.

Ne)at'e ndn)s do not at a!! t%es !ead to a 'a!d $on$!uson for there %a& *e!o)$a! e;"!anatons for the a*sen$e of denta*!e !atent "rnts other than thernot *en) "resent at the s$ene of the $r%e. +n%: %atent n*errints fond on s)ooth

srface are sef% for roses of co)arison in a cri)e %a'orator: 'ecase rints %eft on

ro*h srfaces res%t in dotted %ines or 'ro6en %ines instead of co)%ete and continos

%ines. &ch 6ind of seci)en cannot 'e re%ied on in a n*errint eFa)ination. !he %atent

n*errints are acta%%: oi%: s'stance adherin* to the srfaces of o'Bects that co)e in

contact with the n*ers. #: their ver: natre, oi%: s'stances easi%: sread sch that whenthe n*ers s%ide a*ainst the srface the: toch, no identia'%e %atent rint is %eft, on%:

s)d*es instead. Not a%% o%ice investi*ators are aware of the natre of %atent n*errints so

as to 'e *ided accordin*%: in decidin* which o'Bects to s')it for n*errint %iftin* and

eFa)ination. Notin* the inter%a: of )an: circ)stances invo%ved in the sccessf% %iftin*

and identication of roer %atent n*errints in a artic%ar cri)e scene, the a'sence of

one does not i))ediate%: e%i)inate the ossi'i%it: that the accsedQae%%ants co%d have

'een at the scene of the cri)e. !he: )a: 'e there :et the: had not %eft an: identia'%e

%atent n*errint. #esides, in the case at 'ar, on%: ten %atent n*errints are invo%ved. !he

ndin*s in this artic%ar n*errint eFa)ination are not scient to case even Bst a

reasona'%e do't in their ndin* of *i%t for the cri)e char*ed.

ISSUE 2/: 8hether "o!$e !neMu" s reured *& !a# for "ro"er dent$aton of the a$$used.

HEL4: NO. Face and $od# movement o assailant create lasting imression on

victim. L hether or not there was a revios o%ice %ineQ, the fact is that the: were

ositive%: identied at the tria%. !here is no %aw re9irin* a o%ice %ineQ as essentia% to a

roer identication. !he co)%ainantIs reco*nition of the accsedQae%%ants as her

attac6ers cannot 'e do'ted for she had drin* the carna% acts a)%e oortnit: to see the



faces of the )en who rava*ed her. It s the %ost natura! rea$ton for '$t%s of $r%na! 'o!en$e to str'e to see the !oo9s and fa$es of ther assa!ants ando*ser'e the %anner n #h$h the $r%e #as $o%%tted. Most often the face of the

assai%ant and 'od: )ove)ent thereof, create a %astin* i)ression which cannot easi%: 'e

erased fro) their )e)or:.

ISSUE 1/ Ru!e 02@, su*seuent $r$u%stan$e: 8hether nonM)ht $an *e$onsdered a "roof of nnon$e.

HEL4: NONMFLIGHT NOT PROOF OF INNOCENCE6 CASE AT BAR. !he: c%ai) that the

fact that icente &ta. Ana and i)): #ascSa did not ee, even when the: had a%% the

oortnities to do so, rove their innocence. !he accsedQae%%ants in eKect osit that if

i*ht is an indication of *i%t, nonQi*ht or the decision not to ee, havin* the oortnit: to

do so, is a si*n of innocence. !he &C does not a*ree. A!thou)h t s sett!ed thatune;"!aned )ht nd$ates )u!t, t does not ne$essar!& fo!!o# that a*sen$ethereof "ro'es nno$en$e, s"e$a!!& so #hen there s o'er#he!%n) e'den$e toesta*!sh ther )u!t.

4s"oston: Aea%ed decision A33<RM8 with the M+8<3<CA!<+N that the accsedQ

ae%%ants are he%d Boint%: and severa%%: %ia'%e to inde)nif: i%)a de #e%en for )%ti%e rae

and that none of the accsed is re9ired to reco*ni-e the oKsrin*

RULE 02 ON U4ICIAL NOTICE

Case No. @

THE PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, %aintiKQae%%ee,

vs.

AILON ULAIS, CARLOS FALCASANTOS Q -Co%%ander Fa!$asantos,- A8ALONA=LON HASSAN Q -Co%%ander a%!on,- =AI4 SA=SON Q -Co%%ander Bun),-

U=ATIA A=LANI 4E FALCASANTOS, NOR=A SAHI44AN 4E ULAIS, SALJA4OR=A=ARIL & =EN4O<A, HA4IRUL PLASIN & ALIH, AINU44IN HASSAN & AH=A4,I=A= TARU ALAH & SALIH, ALINA HASSAN 4E A==ING, FRE44IE =ANUEL Q-A7d- and se'era! OHN and ANE 4OES, a$$used, AILON ULAIS, ae%%ant.

G.R. No. 0>>>06 u!& 0, 0@



FACTS• "A*st 22, 1//0( ve <nfor)ations for 6idnain* for ranso) and three infor)ations

for 6idnain* were %ed 'efore the R!C of a)'oan*a Cit: a*ainst Car%os3a%casantos, ai%on $%ais, )ati:a A)%ani, Nor)a &ahiddan de $%ais, a%ina @assande $a))in*, &a%vador Ma)ari%, @adBir% P%asin, ai)ddin @assan, <)a) !ar6 A%ah,

3reddie Mane% and severa% ohn and ane 8oes.→ !he infor)ations for 6idnain* for ranso) set forth identica% a%%e*ations save

for the na)es of the victi)s.

→ !he three infor)ations for 6idnain*, a%so nder Artic%e 27 of the RevisedPena% Code, %i6ewise a%%e*ed identica% facts and circ)stances, eFcet thena)es of the victi)s.

→ +f the twe%ve accsed, on%: nine were arehended.

• !he tria% cort fond Ae%%ant $%ais *i%t: of ve conts of 6idnain* for ranso)and one cont of 6idnain* a wo)an and '%ic ocer, for which oKenses iti)osed on hi) siF ter)s of %ife i)rison)ent.

→ <t a%so fond hi) *i%t: of two conts of s%i*ht i%%e*a% detention for the6idnain* of Monico &aavedra and Ca%iFto 3rancisco.

• "Ma: 7, 1//1( ai%on $%ais, )ati:a A)%ani de 3a%casantos, Nor)a &ahiddan de

$%ais and a%iha @ssin %ed their oint Notice of Aea%.• <n a %etter dated 3e'rar: , 1//7, the sa)e ae%%ants, eFcet ai%on $%ais,

withdrew their aea% 'ecase of their a%ication for a)nest: said )otion *ranted

• @ence, on%: the aea% of $%ais re)ains for the consideration of the &C.

ISSUEhether the tria% cortIs erroneos ta6in* of Bdicia% notice of a witnessI testi)on: inanother case, a%so endin* 'efore it, aKects the conviction of the ae%%ant, whose *i%t isroven 'e:ond reasona'%e do't ': other c%ear, convincin* and overwhe%)in* evidence,'oth testi)onia% and doc)entar:.

HEL4: NO. !he aea% of $%ais is 'ereft of )erit.

<n the case at 'ar, ae%%ant $%ais ar*es that he was denied de rocess when the tria%cort too6 Bdicia% notice of the testi)on: *iven in another case ': one t. Me%9iades3e%iciano, who was the tea) %eader of the *overn)ent troos that catred hi) and hisrorted cohorts. #ecase he was a%%e*ed%: derived of his ri*ht to crossQeFa)ine a)ateria% witness in the erson of ietenant 3e%iciano, he contends that the %atterIstesti)on: sho%d not 'e sed a*ainst hi).

even if the cort a quo did ta6e Bdicia% notice of the testi)on: of ietenant 3e%iciano, it didnot se sch testi)on: in decidin* the cases a*ainst the ae%%ant. @ence, Ae%%ant $%aiswas not denied de rocess. @is conviction was 'ased )ain%: on the ositive identication)ade ': so)e of the 6idna victi)s, na)e%:, essica Ca%nod, Ar)ando #acarro anddi%'erto Pere-. !hese witnesses were s'Bected to )etic%os crossQeFa)inationscondcted ': ae%%antIs conse%. At 'est, then, the tria% cortIs )ention of ietenant3e%icianoIs testi)on: is a decisiona% sr%sa*e which neither aKected the otco)e of thecase nor s'stantia%%: reBdiced Ae%%ant $%ais.

PRINCIPLE: ud$a! Not$e6 As a )enera! ru!e, $ourts shou!d not ta9e 7ud$a! not$e of thee'den$e "resented n other "ro$eedn)s, e'en f these ha'e *een tred or are"endn) n the sa%e $ourt, or ha'e *een heard and are a$tua!!& "endn) *eforethe sa%e 7ud)e.L!re, as a *enera% r%e, corts sho%d not ta6e Bdicia% notice of the



evidence resented in other roceedin*s, even if these have 'een tried or are endin* in thesa)e cort, or have 'een heard and are acta%%: endin* 'efore the sa)e Bd*e. !his isesecia%%: tre in cri)ina% cases, where the accsed has the constittiona% ri*ht to confrontand crossQeFa)ine the witnesses a*ainst hi).

On A!* and 4ena!

urs"ruden$e )'es )reater #e)ht to the "ost'e narraton of "rose$uton#tnesses than to the ne)at'e test%ones of the defense. !he ae%%ant’s 'aredenia% is a wea6 defense that 'eco)es even wea6er in the face of the rosectionwitnesses’ ositive identication of hi). risrdence *ives *reater wei*ht to the ositivenarration of rosection witnesses than to the ne*ative testi)onies of the defense. #etweenositive and cate*orica% testi)on: which has a rin* of trth to it on the one hand, and a 'aredenia% on the other, the for)er *enera%%: revai%s. essica Ca%nod, Ar)ando #acarro anddi%'erto Pere- testied in a c%ear, strai*htforward and fran6 )anner; and their testi)onieswere co)ati'%e on )ateria% oints. Moreover, no i%% )otive was attri'ted to the 6idnavicti)s and none was fond ': this Cort.

Case No. 0>Se$ton 1. Ru!e 02, 8hen hearn) ne$essar&

LAN4BAN OF THE PHILIPPINES vs. SPOUSES JICENTE BANAL and LEONI4ASARENASMBANALG.R. No. 0312?6 u!& 2>, 2>>3

FACTS• A ortion of the %and #asd, Ca)arines Norte owned ': resondent &oses the

vast )aBorit: area 'ein* %%ed with cocont and so)e with a%a:, was co)%sori%:ac9ired ': the 8eart)ent of A*rarian Refor) 8AR rsant to Re'%ic Act R.A.No. J7, as a)ended, otherwise 6nown as the Co)rehensive A*rarian Refor) awof 1/.

• !he 8AR eKected a va%ation of the roert: which was eventa%%: reBected ': hereinresondents.

• A s))ar: ad)inistrative roceedin* was condcted 'efore the Provincia% A*rarianRefor) AdBdicator PARA8 to deter)ine the va%ation of the %and which rendered a8ecision ar)in* the and'an6Is va%ation.

• 8issatised with the 8ecision of the PARA8, resondents %ed with the R!C 8aet,Ca)arines Norte, desi*nated as a &ecia% A*rarian Cort, a etition for deter)inationof Bst co)ensation.4urn) "reMtra!, "artes su*%tted ad%ssons of fa$t and on the sa%e da&,after sad "reMtra!, the $ourt ssued an order ds"ensn) hearn) andreurn) "artes to su*%t ther res"e$t'e %e%oranda.

• &oses i)%eaded the 8AR and and'an6 and therein ra:ed for a co)ensation for'oth cocont %and and rice%and, or an a**re*ate a)ont of P25,000.00.

→ and'an6 was ordered to a: the soses a certain s) wa: 'e:ond thea)ont in and'an6’s va%ation, in cash and in 'onds in the roortion

rovided ': %aw and co)onded interest in cash.• +n aea%, the CA ar)ed in toto the Bd*)ent of the tria% cort. !he and'an6Is

)otion for reconsideration was %i6ewise denied.• @ence, this etition for review on certiorari.

ISSUE: hether the R!C, in conc%din* the va%ation of resondentsI roert: is athori-edto ta6e Bdicia% notice of the records of a case endin* 'efore it Rodri*e- case andthere': Bstied itse%f in a%:in* the sa)e in the case at 'ar withot condctin* a hearin*and withot the other arties’ consent.



HEL4: NO. e%%Qsett%ed is the r%e that corts are not athori-ed to ta6e Bdicia% notice of the contents of the records of other cases even when said cases have 'een tried or areendin* in the sa)e cort or 'efore the sa)e Bd*e. !he: )a: on%: do so in the a'sence of o'Bection and with the 6now%ed*e of the oosin* art:, which are not o'tainin* here.

3rther)ore, as ear%ier stated, the R%es of Cort sha%% a%: to a%% roceedin*s 'efore the&ecia% A*rarian Corts. <n this re*ard, &ection 5, R%e 12/ of the Revised R%es on videnceis eF%icit on the necessit: of a hearin* 'efore a cort ta6es Bdicia% notice of a certain)atter, thsE

&C. 5. Judicial notice, when hearing necessary . D 8rin* the tria%, the cort, on itsown initiative, or on re9est of a art:, )a: announ$e ts ntenton to ta9e

7ud$a! not$e of an: )atter and a!!o# the "artes to *e heard thereon.

After the tria%, and 'efore Bd*)ent or on aea%, the roer cort, on its owninitiative or on re9est of a art:, )a: ta6e Bdicia% notice of an: )atter and a!!o#the "artes to *e heard thereon if sch )atter is decisive of a )ateria% isse inthe case.

4s"oston: Petition GRAN!8.

The ne$esst& of Hearn)

&ections J, and 1 in re%ation to &ection J7 rovides thatE A art: who disa*rees with thedecision of the 8AR adBdicator )a: 'rin* the )atter to the R!C desi*nated as a &ecia%A*rarian Cort for na% deter)ination of Bst co)ensation. <n the roceedin*s 'efore theR!C, it is )andated to a%: the R%es of Cort and, on its own initiative or at the instance of an: of the arties, aoint one or )ore co))issioners to eFa)ine, investi*ate andascertain facts re%evant to the diste, inc%din* the va%ation of roerties, and to %e awritten reort thereof F F F.

<n the case at 'ar, the R!C fai%ed to o'serve the 'asic r%es of rocedre and thefnda)enta% re9ire)ents in deter)inin* Bst co)ensation for the roert:. !he cortdisensed with the hearin* and )ere%: ordered the arties to s')it their resective

)e)oranda. &ch action is *ross%: erroneos since the deter)ination of Bst co)ensationinvo%ves the eFa)ination of theE 1 cost of the ac9isition of the %and; 2 crrent va%e of %i6e roerties; 5 its natre, acta% se and inco)e; 4 sworn va%ation ': the owner; thetaF dec%arations; J sworn va%ation ': the owner; the taF dec%arations; assess)ent)ade ': *overn)ent assessors; 7 socia% and econo)ic 'enets contri'ted ': the far)ersand the far)wor6ers and ': the *overn)ent to the roert:; and nonQa:)ent of taFesor %oans secred fro) an: *overn)ent nancin* instittion on the said %and, if an:.

+'vios%:, these factors invo%ve fa$tua! )atters which can 'e esta'%ished on%: drin* ahearin* wherein the contendin* arties resent their resective evidence. <n fact, tonderscore the intricate natre of deter)inin* the va%ation of the %and, &ection J of thesa)e %aw even athori-es the &ecia% A*rarian Corts to aoint co))issioners for schrose.

Case No. 02Ru!e 02, Se$ton 2, ud$a! Not$e6 8hen 4s$retonar&

HABAGAT GRILL Throu)h LOUIE BIRAOGO, Pro"retor=ana)er, Petitioners,vs.4=CMURBAN PROPERT 4EJELOPER, INC., respondent.G.R. No. 0KK00>6 =ar$h 10, 2>>K

FACTS



ConsnBi <nc. ac9ired and 'eca)e the owner of a residentia% %ot sitated in Matina 8avaoCit:. +n ne 15, 1/1, 8avid ConsnBi <nc transferred said %ot to its sister co)an:, the8MC Tr'an Proert: 8eve%oers, <nc 8MC in whose favor a !C! was issed.A%%e*in* that oie #irao*o forci'%: entered said %ot and 'i%t the @a'a*at Gri%% in 8ece)'er1//5, 8MC %ed "1//4( a Co)%aint for 3orci'%e ntr: a*ainst @a'a*at Gri%% and=or oie#irao*o.

!he Co)%aint a%%e*ed that as owner, 8MC ossessed the %ot in 9estion fro) ne 11, 1/1nti% 8ece)'er 1, 1//5, that on that da:, 8ece)'er 1, 1//5, oie #irao*o, ': )eans of strate*: and stea%th, n%awf%%: entered into the %ot in 9estion and constrcted the @a'a*atGri%% thereon, ths i%%e*a%%: derivin* 8MC of the ossession of said %ot since then to theresent, that the reasona'%e renta% va%e of said %ot is P10,000 a )onth. oie #irao*o in hisAnswer denied i%%e*a%%: enterin* the %ot in 9estion.After necessar: roceedin*s, the Mnicia% !ria% Cort in Cities dis)issed the case on the*rond of %ac6 of Brisdiction and %ac6 of case of action.8MC aea%ed fro) said decision.

R%in* of the CAGrantin* resondent’s aea%, the Cort of Aea%s r%ed that the cort of ori*in had Brisdiction over the Co)%aint for 3orci'%e ntr:.o !he CA *ave *reater wei*ht to the testi)on: of resondent’s rea% roert: )ana*er,

#iena)er Garcia,that @a'a*at Gri%% had 'een 'i%t on 8ece)'er 1, 1//5.

→ !esti)on: was credi'%e, 'ecase he Garcia had ersona% 6now%ed*e of the factshe had testied to QQ it was his tas6 to 6now sch )atters.

o !he CA fa%ted etitioner for not resentin* an: other doc)entar: evidence to esta'%ish

the date of @a'a*at Gri%%’s constrction.

→ Cort of ori*in had i)roer%: adBd*ed the s'Bect roert: as art of the '%icdo)ain.

→ ower cort co%d ta6e co*ni-ance of a Presidentia% Proc%a)ation, 't not of thesitationa% re%ation 'etween the roert: covered ': the Proc%a)ation and the %and in 9estion.

→ CA frther critici-ed etitioner for not resentin* an: evidence to show the 'asisof the %atter’s a%%e*ed athorit: to 'i%d @a'a*at Gri%% on the roert:

@ence, this etition.

ISSUE: 8hether the =TC $an ta9e 7ud$a! not$e under Se$ton 2, Ru!e 02 of theRu!es of Court.

HEL4. NO. Petition has no )erit; CA was correct.

ud$a! Not$e6 =un$"a! Ordnan$es6 8ords and Phrases6 ud$a! not$e s the$o)n5an$e of $ertan fa$ts #h$h 7ud)es %a& "ro"er!& ta9e and a$t on #thout"roof *e$ause the& a!read& 9no# the%6 =un$"a! $ourts %a& ta9e 7ud$a! not$eof the %un$"a! ordnan$es n for$e n the %un$"a!t& n #h$h the& st, *ut su$h

not$e s !%ted to #hat the !a# s and #hat t states.L >dicia% notice is theco*ni-ance of certain facts which Bd*es )a: roer%: ta6e and act on withot roof

'ecase the: a%read: 6now the).? <ts o'Bect is to save ti)e, %a'or and eFense in secrin*

and introdcin* evidence on )atters that are not ordinari%: caa'%e of diste or acta%%:

'ona de disted, and the tenor of which can safe%: 'e ass)ed fro) the tri'na%’s

*enera% 6now%ed*e or fro) a s%i*ht search on its art. <ndeed, )nicia% corts )a: ta6e

Bdicia% notice of the )nicia% ordinances in force in the )nicia%it: in which the: sit. &ch

notice, however, is %i)ited to what the %aw is and what it states.



Sa%e6 A $ourt %a& ta9e ds$retonar& 7ud$a! not$e #here the *oundares of the!ot $o'ered *& the !a# are not a %atter of "u*!$ 9no#!ed)e $a"a*!e of unuestona*!e de%onstraton. !he %ocation of @a'a*at Gri%% cannot 'e reso%ved ':

)ere%: ta6in* Bdicia% notice of Presidentia% Proc%a)ation No. 20; sch %ocation is recise%: at

the core of the diste in this case. Moreover, considerin* resondent’s a%%e*ation that the

sosed %ot covered ': the +rdinance has 'een %ost de to inndation ': the sea, we

cannot fatho) how the tria% cort co%d have 6nown of the acta% %ocation of the )etes and

'onds of the s'Bect %ot. Neither )a: the M!C ta6e discretionar: Bdicia% notice nder

&ection 2 of R%e 12/ of the R%es of Cort, 'ecase the eFact 'ondaries of the %ot covered

': that %aw are not a )atter of '%ic 6now%ed*e caa'%e of n9estiona'%e de)onstration.

Neither )a: these 'e 6nown to Bd*es 'ecase of their Bdicia% fnctions. @ence, the CA was

correct in disre*ardin* the ndin*s of the tria% corts, 'ecase the: had erred in ta6in*

Bdicia% notice of the eFact )etes and 'onds of the roert:. !he ae%%ate cort at%:

re%ied on the Reort s')itted ': the srve: tea) that had 'een constitted ': the tria%

cort, recise%: for the rose of deter)inin* the %ocation of @a'a*at Gri%% in re%ation to

resondent’s %ot.

Digests in Evidence Rule 128 129 130

Documents

Transcript of Digests in Evidence Rule 128 129 130