Duplicate Originals as Evidence: When Photocopies Are Admissible in Philippine Courts

The Supreme Court's 2014 ruling in Capital Shoes Factory, Ltd. v. Traveler Kids, Inc. (G.R. No. 200065) clarifies an important point of Philippine evidence law: documents prepared in multiple copies at the same time are all considered originals and may be admitted as evidence, even if they look like photocopies. The case illustrates how the best evidence rule operates in practice and warns litigants against using certiorari to delay trial proceedings.

The Facts of the Case

Capital Shoes Factory, Ltd. (CSFL), a foreign corporation manufacturing children's footwear, entered into a supply agreement with Traveler Kids, Inc. (TKI), a domestic distributor. Under their arrangement, TKI would pay 30% of the purchase price through letters of credit and the remaining 70% through telegraphic transfer within 30 days of delivery.

After several years of successful transactions, TKI began defaulting on payments in 2004. By July 2005, TKI's unpaid accounts reached US$325,451.39, plus an additional US$92,000.00 worth of goods manufactured according to TKI's specifications. Despite demand letters, TKI failed to pay, prompting CSFL to file a collection suit before the Regional Trial Court (RTC) of Malabon City.

The Evidentiary Dispute

During trial, CSFL presented sales invoices and order slips through its principal witness, Ms. Susan Chiu. TKI objected, claiming the documents were mere photocopies and therefore inadmissible under the best evidence rule. The RTC admitted all exhibits, ruling that Chiu's testimony sufficiently established that the documents were duplicate originals.

TKI then filed a petition for certiorari with the Court of Appeals (CA), which partially granted the petition. The CA excluded certain exhibits, ruling that CSFL failed to prove any exception under Section 3, Rule 130 of the Rules of Court, which requires production of the original document unless specific exceptions apply.

The Supreme Court's Ruling

The Supreme Court reversed the CA, reinstating the RTC's admission of all exhibits. The Court applied Section 4(b), Rule 130 of the Rules of Court, which provides that when a document exists in two or more copies executed at or about the same time with identical contents, all such copies are equally regarded as originals.

The Court found that Chiu's testimony convincingly established that CSFL prepared two copies of each invoice—one for the customer and one retained in the company's office. The retained copies were prepared at the same time as the originals and were therefore duplicate originals, not photocopies.

Citing Trans-Pacific Industrial Supplies v. Court of Appeals (G.R. No. 109172, 1994), the Court reiterated that duplicate originals are admissible as evidence. In that earlier case, the Court explained that when carbon sheets are used to produce facsimiles in a single writing act, all sheets are regarded as duplicate originals, and any of them may be introduced without accounting for the others.

The Proper Remedy for Evidentiary Objections

The Court also addressed TKI's procedural strategy. Instead of presenting its own evidence and appealing any adverse ruling, TKI refused to proceed with trial after filing its certiorari petition. The Court reminded litigants that an order admitting evidence is an interlocutory order—even if erroneous, it constitutes an error of judgment, not jurisdiction.

Citing Johnson Lee v. People (483 Phil. 684, 2004), the Court emphasized that the proper remedy after an adverse evidentiary ruling is to continue with trial and raise the issue on appeal. Resorting to certiorari to challenge evidentiary rulings unduly impedes the orderly administration of justice.

Practical Takeaways

• Duplicate originals are admissible. Documents prepared in multiple copies at the same time with identical contents are all considered originals under Section 4(b), Rule 130 of the Rules of Court. A party need not account for the non-production of other copies.
• Witness testimony can establish duplicate original status. A witness who can credibly explain that copies were made simultaneously with the original—such as a company officer familiar with standard business practices—can lay the foundation for admissibility.
• Not all copies are equal. A true photocopy made later from an original is secondary evidence, admissible only under the exceptions in Section 3, Rule 130 (e.g., loss, destruction, or custody of the adverse party).
• Evidentiary rulings are not certiorari matters. Errors in admitting or excluding evidence are errors of judgment, not jurisdiction. The remedy is to continue trial and raise the issue on appeal.
• Preserve the record. When duplicate originals are compared with photocopies in court, ensure the record reflects this comparison. In this case, the TSNs showed the comparison occurred, but the CA overlooked it.

This article is general information and not legal advice. For your specific situation, consult a lawyer or ask ASG Legal AI.