Philippine Bar review · Topic
Uniformity of Evidentiary Rules
Explore Uniformity of Evidentiary Rules in General Provisions and Principles (Rule 128) for the Philippine Bar. Browse subtopics and published practice…
Explore the syllabus
Direct subtopics
This topic has no further subtopics. Explore its practice questions below.
Put it into practice
Practice questions
- What is the general scope rule in Rule 128, Section 2?
- Under Rule 128, which sources may establish an exception to the general uniformity of evidentiary rules?
- Does Rule 128, Section 2 expressly include hearings within its common evidentiary baseline?
- Two ordinary trial courts hear comparable civil disputes with no applicable special evidentiary rule. One judge announc…
- A civil case generally requires preponderance of evidence while a criminal conviction requires proof beyond reasonable …
- A party in a regular civil trial invokes a decision allowing justified technical flexibility in the CTA and argues that…
- An advocate compares an administrative case governed by substantial evidence with an ordinary criminal trial and demand…
- State the uniformity principle in Rule 128, Section 2 and explain its qualification.
- Does uniformity mean that civil, criminal, and administrative proceedings must always use one identical standard of pro…
- Explain how an advocate should evaluate a claimed special evidentiary practice rather than automatically accepting or r…
- Does Rule128’s uniformity make the assigned courtroom number a source of different evidentiary rules?
- Does a recognized exception applicable to one defined category necessarily abolish the general rule outside that catego…