(BDB Laws Tax Law For Business appears in the opinion section of BusinessMirror every

second and fourth Thursday of the month. BDB Law is an affiliate of Punongbayan & Araullo (P&A).

As a matter of procedure, make that offer

When we hear politicians hurling accusations against fellow politicians on the other side
of the fence, we often hear the one being accused of a wrongdoing shouting back:
Where is your evidence? More often than not, and probably because quite a number of
influential politico belong to the legal profession, we have come to associate evidence
as anything that can be recognized and presented before our courts of justice. And yes,
most of us will tend to agree that a court case can never be won without any evidence.

Our judicial system sees evidence as the means provided by the Rules of Court in
ascertaining the truth in any judicial proceeding. Put differently, not every circumstance
which affords an inference as to whether the matter alleged is true or false is considered
evidence. To have anything considered as evidence, the same must be sanctioned or
allowed by the Rules of Court. One of the more popular rules is that hearsay evidence
is generally not admissible as evidence in our court system.

A not-so-well-known rule (but certainly not less important) is that evidence, to be

considered by the courts, must be formally offered. Under the Rules of Court, the court
cannot consider any evidence which has not been formally offered. Without a formal
offer of evidence, the court cannot determine whether the evidence is admissible or not.

The importance of making a formal offer of evidence cannot be understated. Failure to

do so is fatal to ones cause. In other words, it may lead to the case being decided
against the party failing to make an offer of evidence.

Take for instance the case of Rafael A. Dizon v. Court of Tax Appeals, et al., G.R.
140944, May 6, 2008. In this case, the Supreme Court nullified the Estate tax-
assessment notice issued by the Bureau of Internal Revenue (BIR). The nullification of
the assessment notice was based on the BIRs failure to formally offer this piece of
evidence despite directives coming from the Court of Tax Appeals (CTA). During the
presentation of evidence before the CTA, the BIR officials failed to attend the hearings
despite due notice from the CTA.
The Supreme Court wisely defended the requirement of making a formal offer when it
said, A formal offer is necessary because judges are mandated to rest their findings on
facts, and their judgment only and strictly upon the evidence offered by the parties at the
trial. Its function is to enable the trial judge to know the purpose or purposes for which
the proponent is presenting the evidence. On the other hand, this allows opposing
parties to examine the evidence and object to its admissibility. Moreover, it facilitates
review as the appellate court will not be required to review documents not previously
scrutinized by the trial court (Heirs of Pedro Pasag v. Parocha, G.R. 155483, April 27,
2007).

Aside from being fatal to ones cause, the failure to make an offer of evidence may even
be used as a ground for a disbarment proceeding against the lawyer who failed to make
an offer of evidence. In one instance, the Supreme Court, upon the recommendation of
the Integrated Bar of the Philippines Board of Governors, suspended a lawyer from the
practice of law for failing to formally offer documentary exhibits, whose failure resulted in
the dismissal of the case he was handling (Administrative Case 5474, August 28, 2003).

Some may view the suspension of a lawyer for failing to make the formal offer as quite
harsh, but the Supreme Court does not think so. As far as the highest court is
concerned, the failure to make an offer of evidence may be considered as a patent
violation of the duties of a lawyer. Such failure is a serious transgression, and when it
results in the dismissal of his clients case, constitutes inexcusable fault. Moreover,
according to the Supreme Court, such failure adversely affects the confidence of the
community in the legal profession and erodes the publics trust in the judicial system. I
cannot agree more.

So, the next time you hear of cases (especially high-profile cases) getting dismissed
despite a perception that there is enough evidence to win the case, ask yourself this:
Was the evidence ever offered in court?