DEMURRER TO EVIDENCE

January 9, 2017 G.R. No. 187448

REPUBLIC OF THE PHILIPPINES vs. ALFREDO R. DE BORJA

CAGUIOA, J.
FACTS: Complaint for the recovery of ill-gotten assets allegedly amassed by Velasco was filed
by the Petitioner Republic. Republic claimed that it was De Borja who collected these address
commissions in behalf of Velasco. Trial on the merits ensued.
As stressed by respondent De Borja, the only evidence presented with respect to his liability is the
testimony of Verano. Moreover, during Verano' s cross-examination, it was revealed that he was
not knowledgeable of the contents of the envelopes and that he also never confirmed whether
respondent De Borja had actually received them. Respondent De Borja filed his Demurrer to
Evidence.
The Sandiganbayan found that the evidence presented was insufficient to support a claim for
damages against De Borja, thereby granting respondent De Borja's Demurrer to Evidence.
ISSUE: Whether or not the SB committed reversible error in granting respondent De Borja's
Demurrer to Evidence.
HELD:
A demurrer to evidence is a motion to dismiss on the ground of insufficiency of evidence. It is a
remedy available to the defendant, to the effect that the evidence produced by the plaintiff is
insufficient in point of law, whether true or not, to make out a case or sustain an issue. The question
in a demurrer to evidence is whether the plaintiff, by his evidence in chief, had been able to
establish a prima facie case. In the face of the foregoing testimony, the insinuations of petitioner
Republic in the instant Petition can best be described as speculative, conjectural, and inconclusive
at best. Nothing in the testimony of Verano reasonably points, or even alludes, to the conclusion
that De Borja acted as a dummy or conduit of Velasco in receiving address commissions from
vessel owners.
The Court joins and concurs in the SB's observations pertaining to Verano's want of knowledge
with respect to the contents of the envelopes allegedly delivered to respondent De Borja's office,
which remained sealed the entire time it was in Verano' s possession. As admitted by Verano
himself, he did not and could not have known what was inside the envelopes when they were
purportedly entrusted to him for delivery. In the same vein, Verano did not even confirm
respondent De Borja's receipt of the envelopes, despite numerous opportunities to do so. Relatedly,
it was further revealed during the cross-examination of Verano that in the first place, Velasco did
not even deal directly with brokers. All told, the Court finds that the evidence adduced is wholly
insufficient to support the allegations of the Complaint before the SB.
Thus, for failure of petitioner Republic to show any right to the relief sought, the Court affirms the
SB in granting the Demurrer to Evidence.