Scribd
Upload
179 views3 pages

Hostile Witness

A party can compel a person to be a hostile witness if the court declares them hostile due to their adverse interest, unjustified reluctance to testify, or misleading the party that called them. A party to a case can be used as a hostile witness. The court can compel the issuance of a subpoena ad testificandum for a witness to testify if their testimony is prima facie relevant to the issues in the case. The subpoena must reasonably describe the person or documents sought in order to be issued.

Uploaded by

Chad Baylon
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
179 views3 pages

Hostile Witness

A party can compel a person to be a hostile witness if the court declares them hostile due to their adverse interest, unjustified reluctance to testify, or misleading the party that called them. A party to a case can be used as a hostile witness. The court can compel the issuance of a subpoena ad testificandum for a witness to testify if their testimony is prima facie relevant to the issues in the case. The subpoena must reasonably describe the person or documents sought in order to be issued.

Uploaded by

Chad Baylon
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
You are on page 1/ 3

1.

Under what circumstances/instances can a party compel a person to


be a hostile witness?
2. Can a party to a case be utilized as a hostile witness?

Hostile Witness is one declared so by the court upon adequate


showing of his:
 adverse interest,
 unjustified reluctance to testify, or
 his having misled the party into calling to the stand
 Misleading Facts (Questions which assumes facts not on
record), IF asked:
 On cross-examination, Objectionable for being
misleading
 On direct-examination, Objectionable for lack of
basis

The unwilling or hostile witness so declared OR the witness, who is


an adverse party, may be impeached:
 BY the party presenting him in all respects as if he had been
called by the adverse party, EXCEPT by evidence of his bad
character.
 He may ALSO be impeached and cross-examined: BY the
adverse party, but such cross-examination must ONLY be on
the subject matter of his examination-in-chief. (6a, 7a)

As a General Rule on cross-examination, we follow the English Rule


which states that a witness may be cross-examined, not only upon
matters testified to by him on his direct examination, but also on all
matters relevant to the issue

As an exception, the American Rule is followed. It states that cross


examination is restricted only on facts which are connected with the
matters that have been stated in the direct examination of the
witness, under the following instances:
1. The witness is an unwilling or hostile witness as so declared
by the court OR is an adverse party
2. The witness is an accused who testifies as a witness in his own
behalf
3. When can the court be compelled to issue subpoena ad
testificandum, especially when the document has already been
admitted in pre-con or pre-trial?

SUBPOENA AD TESTIFICANDUM is a process directed to a person


requiring him to attend and to testify at the hearing or the trial of an
action, or at any investigation conducted by competent authority or
for the taking of his deposition [Sec. 1, Rule 21]

Issuance of Subpoena [Sec. 5]


If the government employee or official, or the requested witness, who
is neither the witness of the adverse party nor a hostile witness,
unjustifiably declines to execute a judicial affidavit or refuses without
just cause to make the relevant books, documents, or other things
under his control available for copying, authentication, and eventual
production in court, the requesting party may avail himself of the
issuance of a subpoena ad testificandum or duces tecum under Rule
21 of the Rules of Court. The rules governing the issuance of a
subpoena to the witness in this case shall be the same as when taking
his deposition except that the taking of a judicial affidavit shall be
understood to be ex parte.

Adverse party witnesses and hostile witnesses are excluded since


they are not covered by Section 5. [Tam v. China Banking
Corporation, G.R. No. 214054 (2015)]

This Court, in Roco v. Contreras,[72] ruled that for a subpoena to


issue, it must first appear that the person or documents sought to be
presented are prima facie relevant to the issue subject of the
controversy, to wit:

A subpoena is a process directed to a person requiring


him to attend and to testify at the hearing or trial of an
action or at any investigation conducted under the laws
of the Philippines, or for the taking of his deposition.
In this jurisdiction, there are two (2) kinds of subpoena, to
wit: subpoena ad testificandum and subpoena duces
tecum. The first is used to compel a person to testify,
while the second is used to compel the production of
books, records, things or documents therein specified. As
characterized in H.C. Liebenow vs. The Philippine
Vegetable Oil Company:

The subpoena duces tecum is, in all respects,


like the ordinary subpoena ad testificandum
with the exception that it concludes with an
injunction that the witness shall bring with
him and produce at the examination the
books, documents, or things described in the
subpoena.

Well-settled is the rule that before a subpoena duces


tecum may issue, the court must first be satisfied that the
following requisites are present: (1) the books, documents
or other things requested must appear prima facie
relevant to the issue subject of the controversy (test of
relevancy); and (2) such books must be reasonably
described by the parties to be readily identified (test of
definiteness).[73] (Emphasis supplied.)

In the present case, the CA correctly denied petitioners’ Motion for


the Issuance of Subpoena Ad Testificandum on the ground that the
testimonies of the witnesses sought to be presented during trial were
prima facie irrelevant to the issues of the case. The court a quo aptly
ruled in this manner:

You might also like

pFad - Phonifier reborn

Pfad - The Proxy pFad of © 2024 Garber Painting. All rights reserved.

Note: This service is not intended for secure transactions such as banking, social media, email, or purchasing. Use at your own risk. We assume no liability whatsoever for broken pages.


Alternative Proxies:

Alternative Proxy

pFad Proxy

pFad v3 Proxy

pFad v4 Proxy