Xerox Copy May Be Admissible as Evidence, SC clarifies

 

G.R. No. 168424

In Philippine jurisprudence, the Supreme Court has allowed the admission of secondary evidence when the proponent successfully establishes the basis for its presentation, in accordance with the Revised Rules on Evidence.

In Heirs of Pedro Pasag v. Spouses Parocha (G.R. No. 168424, September 30, 2005), the Court reiterated that secondary evidence of the contents of a document is admissible only upon compliance with Rule 130, Section 5, which requires:

1. Proof of the execution or existence of the original document;
   
2. Proof of the loss, destruction, or unavailability of the original; and
   
3. A showing that the unavailability was not due to bad faith on the part of the proponent. (Or laying the basis rule)
   

In this case, the petitioners were able to establish the loss of the original document and the due execution of the same, thereby satisfying the requirements for the admission of secondary evidence.

Similarly, in Department of Education, Culture and Sports (DECS) v. Del Rosario (G.R. No. 146586, January 26, 2005), the Court held that when the original document has been lost or destroyed, secondary evidence of its contents may be admitted, provided that the offeror satisfactorily explains the loss or destruction of the original.

These cases underscore the importance of [l]aying a proper foundation for the admission of secondary evidence, ensuring that the proponent demonstrates the unavailability of the original document through no fault of their own, and that the secondary evidence presented is a faithful and accurate representation of the original.

RELATED

Previous Bar Question:

“In a case for Estafa, the prosecution offered the photocopy of the acknowledgment receipt signed by the accused showing personal receipt of the sum of money from the private complainant to prove the amount of damage. Accused objected to the offer of the photocopy on the sole ground that it is a mere reproduction of the original in violation of the original document rule. The court overruled the accused’s objection and admitted in evidence the photocopy of the acknowledgment receipt. Did the court err in admitting the photocopy? Explain briefly. (5 points)” (2022 Bar, Remedial Law 1, Question No. 15).

SUGGESTED ANSWER

Yes, the court erred in admitting the photocopy of the acknowledgment receipt without proper justification, as it contravenes the Original Document Rule.

Under the Original Document Rule, as stated in Section 3, Rule 130 of the Revised Rules on Evidence, when the subject of inquiry is the contents of a document, no evidence is admissible other than the original document itself, except in specific cases such as when the original is lost, destroyed, or cannot be produced in court.

In this estafa case, the prosecution presented a photocopy of the acknowledgment receipt to prove the amount of damage. The accused objected, citing the Original Document Rule. The court overruled the objection and [a]dmitted the photocopy [w]ithout requiring the prosecution to demonstrate that the original document was unavailable or to provide a valid exception to the rule. (Laying the basis rule). This action disregards the necessity of presenting the original document or establishing a legitimate reason for its absence.

Hence, the court's [a]dmission of the photocopy [w]ithout proper justification was erroneous, as it violated the Original Document Rule, which mandates the presentation of the original document or a valid exception for the admission of [s]econdary evidence.