Incorporation into Public Record (RP V. Sandiganbayan) - If a private writing itself is inserted officially into a public record, its record, its recordation, or its incorporation into the public record becomes a public document, but that does not make the private writing itself a public document so as to make it admissible without authentication

Ancient Document Rule (21) - Any document that complies with the following requisites:

1. More than 30 years old;
2. Produced from a custody in which it would naturally be found if genuine; and
3. Unblemished by any alterations or circumstances of suspicion
   3a. When Suspicious (Bartolome v. IAC) - If deed was incomplete, unsigned or, person who signed was illiterate (Cequena v. Bolante)

Objection to Improperly Authenticated Document (Patula) - Say no basis or, that the document being testified on was not properly authenticated. Just manifest continuing objection, take note of it in memorandum and on appeal.

Presumption of Understanding (Heirs of Doronio v. Doronio) - Where such document, not so accompanied with a translation in English or Filipino, is offered in evidence and not objected to, either by the parties or the court, it must be presumed that the language in which the document is written is understood by all, and the document is admissible in evidence.

How Alteration is Accounted For - Party producing document may show that the alteration was either:

1. WITH CONSENT - Was made with the consent of the parties affected by it;
2. INNOCENT - Was otherwise properly or innocently made; or

3. NO CONCURRENCE - Was made by another, without his/her concurrence

   
   

4. SAME MEANING - Did not change the meaning or language of the instrument.

How Judicial Record Impeached (Section 29) - Any judicial record may be impeached by evidence of any of the following:

1. LACK OF JURISDICTION - want of jurisdiction in the court or judicial officer[;]
2. COLLUSION - collusion between the parties[;] or
3. FRAUD - in the party offering the record, in respect to the proceedings.

Kho v. Republic -

1. In sustaining the finding of the lower court that a marriage license was lacking, this Court relied on the Certification issued by the local civil registrar, which stated that the alleged marriage license could not be located as the same did not appear in their records.
2. Contrary to petitioner's asseveration, nowhere in the Certification was it categorically stated that the officer involved conducted a diligent search.
3. In this respect, this Court held that Section 28, Rule 132 of the Rules of Court does not require a categorical statement to this effect.
4. Abbas XCPN - If proof of other marriage license with the same number, no categorical statement may be sufficient.

What Attestation must State (25) -

1. Must state that the copy is a correct copy of the original or a specific part thereof, as the case may be
2. Must be under the official seal of the attesting officer, if there be any, or if he/she be the clerk of a court having a seal, under the seal of such court

Proof of Notarial Documents (Section 30) - Every notarized instrument may be presented in evidence without further proof.

1. Proof of Execution - the certificate of acknowledgment being prima facie evidence of the execution of the instrument or document involved.
2. Proof of Facts/Date which gave rise to execution - Such notarized documents are evidence, even against 3rd persons, of the facts which gave rise to their execution and of the date of execution

Contract is what law defines it as, not what the parties call it.

Steps to Interpretation (SEASCORP v. Seagull) -

1. GR - If clear, don't interpret.
2. XCPN - But NCC 1370 also provides that if the words appear contrary to the evident intention of the parties, it is the intention that must prevail.

Interpretation by the Parties - However, if the parties themselves put forward an interpretation, then that interpretation shall be controlling.

Stipulations with different possible meanings, 1375 – The meaning that is most in keeping with the nature and the object of the contract shall be used in cases where there are different possible meanings to a particular stipulation.

However, even with particular terms contracts cannot be construed to include matters which are distinct from that which the parties intended to contract. i.e. a sale of a piece of land cannot be construed to include something not the subject-matter of the sale.

Multiple Interpretations (1373) - If an instrument is susceptible to interpretations which can make it either legal or illegal, that which would render it legal and effective is the proper interpretation.

Usage/Custom (1376) - Usage or customs of a place shall be a factor in interpreting an ambiguous

Multiple Stipulations (1374) - In cases where there are various stipulations which raise a doubtful interpretation, all of the parts of the contract shall be construed together if possible. With such construction being determined by the intent of the parties as gathered from the words they used as well as their prior, contemporaneous and subsequent acts.

Gratuitous - Requires that the doubts refer to incidental circumstances, the interpretation that allows the least transmission of rights and interests shall prevail.

Reciprocity of interests – maximize mutual benefit.

According to Circumstances (130.14) - The circumstances under which the instrument was made, including the situation of the subject and the parties may be shown so that judge may be placed in the position of those whose language they are to interpret.

According to Usage (130.20) - An instrument
may be construed according to usage, in order to determine its true character

Legal Meaning (130.11) -

1. GR - Language of writing to be interpreted according to the legal meaning it bears in the place of its execution.
2. XCPN - Parties intended otherwise.

Intent - The intention of the parties is to be pursued when there is need to construe.

Peculiar Signification of Terms (130.15) -

1. General Rule - Terms of a writing presumed to be used in their primary and general acceptation.
2. XCPN - Evidence is admissible to show that they have a peculiar, technical or local signification and were so used and understood in that particular instance.

Written & Printed Words (130.16) - If instrument partly written and partly printed, the written part controls the printed part if they are inconsistent.

Instrument as a Whole (130.12) - Where there are several provisions or particulars, if possible, construction that gives effect to all is adopted.

Sec. 17. Construction where instrument is ambiguous. - Where the language of the instrument is ambiguous or there are omissions therein, the following rules of construction apply:

(a) Where the sum payable is expressed in words and also in figures and there is a discrepancy between the two, the sum denoted by the words is the sum payable; but if the words are ambiguous or uncertain, reference may be had to the figures to fix the amount;

(b) Where the instrument provides for the payment of interest, without specifying the date from which interest is to run, the interest runs from the date of the instrument, and if the instrument is undated, from the issue thereof;

(c) Where the instrument is not dated, it will be considered to be dated as of the time it was issued;

(d) Where there is a conflict between the written and printed provisions of the instrument, the written provisions prevail;

(e) Where the instrument is so ambiguous that there is doubt whether it is a bill or note, the holder may treat it as either at his election;

(f) Where a signature is so placed upon the instrument that it is not clear in what capacity the person making the same intended to sign, he is to be deemed an indorser;

(g) Where an instrument containing the word "I promise to pay" is signed by two or more persons, they are deemed to be jointly and severally liable thereon. 

Rationale - by virtue of its official or sovereign character, or because it has been acknowledged before a notary public (except a notarial will) or a competent public official with the formalities required by law, or because it is a public record of a private writing authorized by law

Certifications (Republic v. Galeno) - Are not public documents.

Authenticating Assignment of Mortgage Abroad - Must comply with Rule 132.25 when the SPA is executed and acknowledged before a notary public or other competent official in a foreign country, it cannot be admitted in evidence unless it is certified as such in accordance with the foregoing provision of the rules by a secretary of embassy or legation, consul general, consul, vice consul, or consular agent or by any officer in the foreign service of the Philippines stationed in the foreign country in which the record is kept of said public document and authenticated by the seal of his office.

Prima Facie Presumption -

1. Facts Stated Therein
2. Execution

Natural Rights (130.19) - When an instrument is equally susceptible of two [(2)] interpretations, one [(1)] in favor of natural right and the other against it, the former is to be adopted.

Multiple Constructions (130.18) -

1. The interpretation most favorable to the party in whose favor the provision was made shall be adopted.
2. Interpretation which one party intends the other party to understand the provision

Express Pleading (Ortañes v. CA) - No implied allegation of the exceptions. There exceptions must be expressly put in issue or squarely presented in the pleadings. No implied.

Extrinsic Ambiguity - An amibiguity that arises from the very face of the instrument due to defective/obscure//insensible language.

• Here, parol evidence not admissible as this would amount to the creation of a contract. (Void due to vitiated consent? or reformation idk)

Nature of the Mistake (BPI v. Fidelity and Surety) - must be a mistake of fact, mutual to the parties.The pleading need not specifically state the words mistake and failure. So long as the other party makes a proper denial, the matters are put in issue.

Imperfection (Regalado) - covers inaccurate statements, incompleteness in the writing, or inconsistent provisions.

Reformation - In such cases, these are grounds for a reformation of instrument under NCC 1359. But, if there is no meeting of the minds, the proper action is an action for annulment on the basis of vitiation of consent under NCC 1390.

Validity of Written Agreement - Parol evidence may be admitted to show:

1. True consideration of a contract
2. Want/Illegality of consideration
3. Incapacity of parties
4. Fictitious/absolutely simulated contract
5. Fraud in inducement [2 Regalado 733, 2008 Ed.]
   

Contemporaneous Agremeent (LASEDECO v. Garcia) - There, oral agreement established condition precedent . Parol evidence introduced to prove failure to reflect true intent of parties.

Rationale for Subsequent Agreements (Baluyut v. Poblete) - Where a document, for example, is executed on July 1, it may be held to embody the final and exclusive result of negotiations before and up to the time of execution; but a transaction on August 1 must be a separate one and therefore can never be excluded, so far as the effect of the document of July 1, is concerned. It may be that some rule or form may make that transaction of August 1 invalid but the present rule can interpose no obstacle.

Failure to Express (Heirs of Policronio) - If simulated sale, then no failure to express true intent and agreement of the parties. But instead, validity of written agreement.

Sps. Amoncio v. Benedicto - Here, parol evidence as regards prior/contemporaneous oral agreement was accepted because of failure to object to presentation. In addition, estoppel applied as Sps. Amoncio signed the building permit.

Rationale (Cruz v. CA) - the presumption that when the parties have reduced their agreement to writing, the parties have made such writing the only repository and memorial of the truth. Thus, whatever it is not found in the writing is understood to have been waived or abandoned by the parties.

• This gives primacy to the literal terms of the written agreements between the parties. However, it applies only to the written agreement itself, and not as regards any contemporaneous, or subsequent oral agreements between the same parties.
  

Nature - An exclusionary rule, meaning sets of evidence are excluded if not compliant with the rule. Applies to evidence aliunde or evidence extraneous to the written contract between the parties. Not necessarily oral evidence.

Original Document - Can be invoked by any party to an action regardless if they participated in the writing involved.

Original Document - Applies to all kinds of writings, recordings, photographs, or any material containing letters, words, sounds, numbers, figures, symbols, or their equivalent, or other modes of written expression offered as proof of their contents

Original Document - Prohibits the introduction of substitutionary evidence in lieu of the original document regardless if it varies the contents of the original

Statement of Fact (Cruz v. CA) - A statement of fact expressed in the instrument may be varied by parol evidence.

Parol Evidence - Presupposes that the original document is available in court.

Original Document - Original writing is not available/there is a dispute as to whether the writing is original.

Strangers - Strangers to a contract are not bound by the parol evidence rule. Thus, if at-least one party to the suit is not a party or privy of a party to the written instrument, the rule may not be invoked.

Public Documents (Inciong v. CA) - Parol evidence applies to all agreements in writing, need not be a public document.

Cause of Doubt (Capital Insurance v. Sadang) - Ambiguity is to be resolved against the party who caused the ambiguity/prepared the document.

1. Audited Statements (Salas v. Sta. Mesa Market Corp)

• GR: Financial statements prepared by external auditors who are certified public accountants (like those presented by petitioner) are audited financial statements. Financial statements, whether audited or not, are, as general rule, private documents.
• EXPN: Once financial statements are filed with a government office pursuant to a provision of law, they become public documents.

2. Use of Jurat (Pan pacific v. CA) - Use of jurat instead of an acknowledgment means that the document remians private document, NOT public document.

Coverage (Spouses Fabre v. CA) - Certification requirement applies only to 19a i.e., entries in public records found abroad. For other classes of public documents, no need to attestation.

Considered a hearsay exception. (People v. Lazaro)

Admission as Part of Testimony (Delfin v. Billones) - A document or writing which is admitted not as independent evidence but merely as part of the testimony of a witness does not constitute proof of the facts related therein.

Presumption;How Overturned (Gutierrez v. Mendoza) - By clear and convincing evidence.

Expert Witnesses (Jimenez v. Commission on Ecumenical Mission) - The opinions of handwriting experts, even those from the NBI and the PC, are not binding upon courts. This principle holds true especially when the question involved is mere handwriting similarity or dissimilarity, which can be determined by a visual comparison of specimens of the questioned signatures with those of the currently existing ones.

Non-Material Alterations (Sps Cirelo v. Hernandez) - If alteration as regards a non-material part or, alteration was already existing when document received.

Failure to Object (People v. Tomaquin) - However, in this case, since appellant did not interpose any objection thereto, and the parties and the judicial authorities or personnel concerned appeared to be familiar with or knowledgeable of Cebuano in which the document was written, such extrajudicial confession was deemed appropriately considered by the trial court as evidence for the prosecution.

Authenticaiton of Text Messages (Viallion-Magtolis v. .Salud) - Ephemeral electronic communications are now admissible evidence, subject to certain conditions. “Ephemeral electronic communication” refers to telephone conversations, text messages, chatroom sessions, streaming audio, streaming video, and other electronic forms of communication the evidence of which is not recorded or retained. Under Section 1(k), Rule 2 of the Rules on Electronic Evidence. These are proven by the testimony of a person who was a party to the same or has personal knowledge thereof,

Facsimile Transmissions (Torres v. Pagcor) - Not considered an electronic document.

Recognition of Apostillized Documents - Only if all the following conditions are met:

1. The state in which the document was issued is a party to the Convention;
2. The state in which the document is to be used is also party to the Convention;
3. The law of the state in which the document was issued considers the document as a public instrument; and
4. The state in which the document is to be used requires an apostille in order to recognize the document as a foreign public document.