Commercial lists and the like | Exceptions to the hearsay rule | Hearsay Rule | Testimonial Evidence (RULE 130) | EVIDENCE

COMPREHENSIVE DISCUSSION ON THE HEARSAY RULE EXCEPTION FOR “COMMERCIAL LISTS AND THE LIKE” UNDER PHILIPPINE REMEDIAL LAW

I. INTRODUCTION

Under Philippine rules on evidence, the general principle is that hearsay evidence is inadmissible. Hearsay is defined as any out-of-court statement offered to prove the truth of the matter asserted, where the declarant does not testify under oath in the current proceeding and is not subject to cross-examination about that statement.

However, the Rules of Court (particularly Rule 130 on the Rules on Evidence) recognize numerous exceptions to the hearsay rule. One such exception is the “Commercial Lists and the Like.” When properly established, these commercial lists may be received in evidence even though they are not produced by a person testifying in court.

II. LEGAL BASIS

The primary authority for this exception is found in the Rules of Court, specifically Rule 130, which underwent revisions in the 2019 Amendments to the Rules on Evidence. Under the post-2019 structure, the provision typically appears in the section enumerating hearsay exceptions. (Previously, it appeared in a slightly different numbering, but its substance remains consistent.)

The current wording (as of the 2019 Amendments) is substantially as follows:

“Commercial lists and the like.” – Evidence of statements of matters of interest to persons engaged in an occupation contained in a list, register, periodical, or other published compilation is admissible as an exception to the hearsay rule, if the compilation is generally used and relied upon by persons engaged in that occupation.

This means that while the document is formally hearsay—because it is a written statement offered to prove what it asserts without the author present in court—it is treated as sufficiently trustworthy so that it may be admitted into evidence.

III. RATIONALE FOR THE EXCEPTION

  1. Reliability Through General Usage
    The theory underlying this exception is that such publications have an indicia of reliability because persons in a particular trade or industry regularly consult these commercial lists (or similar publications) in the ordinary course of their business. A false or inaccurate publication could undermine the publisher’s reputation and the reliance placed upon it. This “market check” imposes a practical measure of trustworthiness on such listings.

  2. Necessity and Convenience
    Because it would be cumbersome and often impractical to bring in the authors or compilers of every published list as witnesses, the law provides a shortcut: once you show that these materials are commonly used and relied upon by those in the relevant occupation, their statements may be accepted in evidence.

  3. Protection Against Fabrication
    Commercial lists—if widely circulated—risk credibility and circulation if they publish spurious data. Hence, there is an intrinsic incentive for accuracy, serving as a built-in safeguard against fabrication.

IV. COVERAGE AND EXAMPLES

The rule covers a wide array of publications and compilations, so long as they are:

  1. Published – The material should be in a form generally accessible to the relevant public or to the persons in the trade.
  2. Comprehensive or Systematic – It typically must be a compilation or list that is meant to record data systematically (e.g., directories, registers, trade journals).
  3. Generally Relied Upon – Persons engaged in the relevant trade, profession, or occupation regularly consult and rely on such material.

Common examples include, but are not limited to:

  • Trade directories (e.g., a directory listing suppliers for a specific industry).
  • Shipping registers or maritime registries (e.g., Lloyd’s Register of Ships).
  • Stock market or financial market listings that brokers or traders commonly reference.
  • Valuation tables for certain commodities or standard reference for pricing.
  • Telephone directories or membership rosters for professional associations (though these may be less relied upon in modern practice, they remain illustrative examples).
  • Price lists or catalogs widely used in a trade.

V. REQUISITES FOR ADMISSIBILITY

To invoke this hearsay exception successfully, the proponent must generally show:

  1. Relevance
    - The statement from the commercial list must be relevant to the fact in issue or resolution of the case.

  2. Proper Authentication / Preliminary Proof of Trustworthiness
    - The proponent should establish that the list or published compilation is the kind that is commonly used and relied upon by persons engaged in that particular occupation.
    - This can be done by presenting a witness (e.g., an experienced professional in that trade) who can testify that such a list is well-regarded, frequently consulted, and trustworthy.
    - Authenticity of the specific document itself can be shown through standard rules on documentary evidence (e.g., presenting it in its published form, showing that it is an official, genuine publication).

  3. Regular Publication for a Trade or Occupation
    - The statements must pertain to matters of interest to that trade or occupation (e.g., standard prices, addresses, membership, or some technical detail published for reference).

  4. No Indicative Bias or Specific Motive to Falsify
    - Although not always stated explicitly in the rule, it is best practice to show that the publication is not produced under the impetus of a lawsuit, or under biased circumstances. Generally, these lists are maintained independently, for commercial or public consumption, so the impetus to falsify is low.

VI. DISTINGUISHING FROM RELATED HEARSAY EXCEPTIONS

  1. Entries in the Course of Business

    • This exception deals with records made by a person in the regular course of business or duty (such as a company ledger or daily business records).
    • By contrast, commercial lists are typically compiled by a third party or an organization for broad usage in a specific field or industry.

  2. Official Records

    • Public officers or agencies produce official records in the exercise of their functions.
    • Commercial lists, however, are usually published by private entities or trade associations, not the government, although official records may similarly be accepted for their trustworthiness under other rules.

  3. Learned Treatises

    • Learned treatises, periodicals, or pamphlets on scientific or historical matters are also an exception to hearsay.
    • The main difference is that commercial lists are not necessarily about academic or scientific authority; rather, they address day-to-day data relevant to a specific trade or commercial activity.

VII. JURISPRUDENTIAL NOTES

While there are fewer reported Supreme Court decisions specifically and solely on “commercial lists and the like,” references appear in discussions of other hearsay exceptions. Courts generally accept the principle that if the list is used widely by persons in the trade or profession, and recognized as reliable, it can be introduced in evidence for the truth of what it states.

Key points often emphasized by the courts are:

  • A showing that the publication is well-recognized in the community for accuracy.
  • The business or trade relies on this type of publication for operational or decision-making processes.
  • The opposing party may still challenge the reliability or authenticity of the specific record if there is reason to doubt its trustworthiness (e.g., out-of-date publication, partial or spurious entries).

VIII. PRACTICAL APPLICATION AND PROCEDURE

  1. Marking and Identification

    • During trial, the party offering the commercial list must mark it as an exhibit and have it identified by a competent witness who can speak about its general acceptance in the trade.

  2. Testimony on Usage and Reliability

    • Typically, you call a witness from the relevant field or occupation who can say, “Yes, we rely on ‘X Directory’ to find legitimate addresses or contact information in the shipping industry. It is standard practice.”

  3. Opportunity for Cross-Examination

    • The opposing party may cross-examine the witness to test the reliability, authenticity, and up-to-dateness of the commercial list. If the cross-examination reveals glaring inaccuracies or a compromised source, the court may give the evidence little weight.

  4. Weight vs. Admissibility

    • Satisfying the hearsay exception makes the commercial list admissible as evidence, but the weight or probative value ultimately assigned to it is for the judge to determine. The judge will evaluate whether the list is indeed credible and whether it directly supports the factual propositions in issue.

IX. LIMITATIONS

  1. Scope Restriction

    • The exception is confined to data or statements that are relevant to matters in which the trade or occupation has an interest. If the list contains information outside the purview of the trade’s reliance, that portion may not be as readily admissible.

  2. Modern Digitized Sources

    • In contemporary practice, “commercial lists” may appear in electronic form (e.g., online directories, subscription-based industry portals). While the rule still applies, parties must ensure proper authentication of digital evidence under the rules on electronic evidence (e.g., proving website reliability, official nature of an online repository).

  3. No Blanket Admission of All Data

    • Only those portions or entries that are relevant and verified as standard references in the trade come within the exception. A party cannot smuggle in extraneous or self-serving statements just because they appear in the same publication.

  4. Subject to Rebuttal

    • Opposing counsel may introduce contradictory evidence or show that the list in question has been discredited, is obsolete, or is not truly relied upon in the occupation. If proven, the court may disregard or significantly reduce the probative value of the list.

X. SUMMARY OF KEY POINTS

  • Nature: “Commercial lists and the like” is a recognized hearsay exception under Philippine evidence law.
  • Foundational Requirements: Must be shown that the list is published, regularly used, and relied upon by the relevant industry or trade.
  • Justification: The reliability is grounded on the idea that in commercial contexts, accuracy is essential for continued usage, thus providing a built-in guarantee of trustworthiness.
  • Limitations: Must only encompass statements relevant to that occupation, and it remains subject to the other party’s rebuttal or impeachment regarding accuracy or authenticity.
  • Practical Benefit: Saves the court and parties from unnecessary inconvenience of calling compilers or numerous custodians of widely accepted commercial or trade references.

XI. CONCLUSION

The hearsay rule in Philippine law, while broad, has practical exceptions designed to facilitate truth-seeking and accommodate the realities of commerce, trade, and professional practice. “Commercial lists and the like” stand as an important—and relatively straightforward—exception, providing an expedient means of establishing certain facts through widely recognized references.

To use this exception effectively, a lawyer must:

  1. Identify the list’s nature and scope;
  2. Ensure it is a published compilation genuinely relied upon by persons in the relevant occupation; and
  3. Lay down adequate foundational testimony to convince the court of its trustworthiness.

Once these requirements are met, the statements in the commercial list can be admitted in evidence despite technically being hearsay. Ultimately, however, weight is left to judicial discretion, guided by a thorough assessment of reliability, authenticity, and relevance under the Rules of Court.

Disclaimer: This content is not legal advice and may involve AI assistance. Information may be inaccurate.

Privacy Policy

Terms of Use

Lawyer Login

 
 
Privacy Policy         Terms of Use         Lawyer Login