Latest Posts

Friday, December 15, 2017

Tender of Excluded Evidence

Tender of Excluded Evidence
When an attorney is not allowed by the court to present testimony which he thinks is competent, material and necessary to prove his case, he must make an offer of proof. This is the method of properly preserving the record to the end that the question may be saved for purposes of review. (Caraig, 2004)

How is tender of excluded evidence made?
1.       As to documentary or object evidence – It may have the same attached to or made part of the record (Sec. 40,  Rule 132)
2.      As to oral evidence – It may state for the record that the name and other personal circumstances of the witness and the substance of the proposed testimony. (Sec. 40, Rule 132)

Offer of Proof vs. Offer of Evidence
Offer of Proof/Tender of Excluded Evidence – only resorted to if admission is refused by the court for purposes of review on appeal.
Offer of  Evidence – refers to testimonial, documentary or object evidence that are presented or offered in court by a party so that the court can consider his evidence when it comes to the preparation of the decision.

The Rules allows the presentation of additional evidence even after the case has rested. (Republic vs. Sandiganbayan, GR 152375, December 13, 2011)

Wednesday, December 06, 2017

Wildfires ravaged high-end residences in Los Angeles

Some of the exclusive neighborhoods near Bel Air in Los Angeles were devastated by wildfires recently.

It ruined 450 acres and focused mostly in places where the luxury residences of Hollywood actors and actresses are located.

Mayor Eric Garcetti informed the media that the plan of the city is to stop the fire before it becomes bigger. Now, 700 families have been evacuated. Based on the report of the fire department, four homes were left desolated and eleven were damaged.

The fire started in Sepulveda Pass. San Diego I-405 Freeway has been temp0rarily closed because of the blaze.

RCBC vs CIR Case Digest

FACTS: RCBC assails the validity of the waivers of the statute of limitations on the ground that the said waivers failed to indicate acceptance or agreement of the CIR as required under Section 223(b) of the 1997 Tax Code. RCBC further argues that the principle of estoppel cannot be applied against it because its payment of the other tax assessments does not signify a clear intention on its part to give up its right to question the validity of the waivers. Is RCBC correct?

HELD: Under Article 1431 of the Civil Code, the doctrine of estoppel is anchored on the rule that “an admission or representation is rendered conclusive upon the person making it, and cannot be denied or disproved as against the person relying thereon.” A party is precluded from denying his own acts, admissions or representations to the prejudice of the other party in order to prevent fraud and falsehood.

Estoppel is clearly applicable in this case. RCBC, through its partial payment of the revised assessments, issued within the extended period as provided for in the questioned waivers, impliedly admitted the validity of those waivers. Had petitioner truly believed that the waivers were invalid and that the assessments were issued beyond the prescriptive period, then it should not have paid the reduced amount of taxes in the revised assessment. Thus, RCBC is estopped from questioning the validity of the waivers. (Rizal Commercial Banking Corporation vs Commissioner of Internal Revenue, GR 170257, September 7, 2011)