Вы находитесь на странице: 1из 3

REBUTTAL EVIDENCE

I.

What is Rebuttal Evidence?

The concept of rebuttal evidence, surfaces in Rule 30 of the Rules of Court on


Civil Procedure, highlighting the Order of Trial
Section 5. Order of trial. Subject to the provisions of section 2 of
Rule 31, and unless the court for special reasons otherwise directs, the
trial shall be limited to the issues stated in the pre-trial order and shall
proceed as follows:
(a) The plaintiff shall adduce evidence in support of his complaint;
(b) The defendant shall then adduce evidence in support of his
defense, counterclaim, cross-claim and third-party complaints;
(c) The third-party defendant if any, shall adduce evidence of his
defense, counterclaim, cross-claim and fourth-party complaint;
(d) The fourth-party, and so forth, if any, shall adduce evidence of the
material facts pleaded by them;
(e) The parties against whom any counterclaim or cross-claim has been
pleaded, shall adduce evidence in support of their defense, in the order
to be prescribed by the court;
(f) The parties may then respectively adduce rebutting evidence only,
unless the court, for good reasons and in the furtherance of justice,
permits them to adduce evidence upon their original case; and
(g) Upon admission of the evidence, the case shall be deemed
submitted for decision, unless the court directs the parties to argue or
to submit their respective memoranda or any further pleadings.
If several defendants or third-party defendants, and so forth, having separate
defenses appear by different counsel, the court shall determine the relative
order of presentation of their evidence. (1a, R30)
II.

What is the meaning of Rebuttal/Rebutting Evidence?

According to Blacks Law Dictionary:


The term that is given to testimony and evidence that shows that the
evidence that was presented by the opposing party is not true.
To understand better, under Merriam-Webster Dictionary, to rebut is:
verb rebut \ri-bt\
: to prove (something) is false by using arguments or evidence
: to contradict or oppose by formal legal argument, plea, or
countervailing proof
: to expose the falsity of

III.

Is Right to Present Rebuttal Evidence Part of Due Process?

According to the Supreme Court in Ligaya Santos et al v. Judge Rolando


How (A.M. No. RTJ-05-1946, January 26, 2007)

Jurisprudence is replete with decisions on the right of petitioner in bail


proceedings to introduce his own evidence in rebuttal.[13] Respondent
failed to observe and consider for his proper determination and evaluation
the weight of evidence presented by the prosecution. This, to our mind, is
a clear denial of complainants right to due process and equal protection of
the law as embodied in our Constitution.
XXX
Respondent, in effect, deprived the accused with their right to present
rebuttal evidence which to our mind is a clear violation of their right to
due process and equal protection of the law. As aptly observed by the
OCA, dictates of fair play should have at least reminded respondent to
inquire first of the nature of the evidence proposed to be presented,
determine whether or not it will be essential for the purpose of
ascertaining entitlement to bail, before discarding any evidence
outright. This is in keeping with procedural due process, given established
rules and jurisprudence on bail
Further, the Court states in Republic v Sandiganbayan et al (GR No.
152375, December 16, 2011)
A partys declaration of the completion of the presentation of his evidence
prevents him from introducing further evidence;[77] but where the
evidence is rebuttal in character, whose necessity, for instance, arose
from the shifting of the burden of evidence from one party to the other;
[78]
or where the evidence sought to be presented is in the nature of newly
discoveredevidence,[79] the partys right to introduce further evidence must
be recognized. Otherwise, the aggrieved party may avail of the remedy
of certiorari.
XXX
In Lopez v. Liboro,[84] we had occasion to make the following
pronouncement:
After the parties have produced their respective direct proofs, they are
allowed to offer rebutting evidence only, but, it has been held, the court,
for good reasons, in the furtherance of justice, may permit them to offer
evidence upon their original case, and its ruling will not be disturbed in
the appellate court where no abuse of discretion appears. So, generally,
additional evidence is allowed when it is newly discovered, or where
it has been omitted through inadvertence or mistake, or where the
purpose of the evidence is to correct evidence previously offered. The
omission to present evidence on the testator's knowledge of Spanish had
not been deliberate. It was due to a misapprehension or oversight.
(citations omitted; emphases ours)
So how do we make good rebuttal examination of a witness?

1. Know Your Case Inside Out


2. Note down the arguments and evidence presented by your opponent,
find unplugged loopholes
3. Use a rebuttal card or sheet
4. Do not be so agitated or antagonistic, refrain from being a Pit bull
Attorney
5. Learn to speak off the top of your head
6. Be confident
7. Use different means of reasoning: Analogy, Refutation or simple logic
8. Know when rebuttal evidence is necessary or will be detrimental to
your case