g. Opinion Rule

Opinion Rule

Concept

The opinion rule starts with exclusion: a witness’s opinion is not admissible unless it falls within the exceptions in the following sections of Rule 130. The rule therefore calls for identifying the subject of the opinion and the basis for receiving it, rather than treating every conclusion offered by a witness as evidence. (Rule 130, Sec. 51, A.M. No. 19-08-15-SC)¹

Governing provisions

Rule 130, Section 51 states the general rule. Section 52 permits opinion on a matter requiring special knowledge, skill, experience, training, or education when the witness is shown to possess the relevant qualification. Section 53 permits specified opinions and impressions of an ordinary witness when a proper basis is given. (Rule 130, Sec. 51, A.M. No. 19-08-15-SC)¹ (Rule 130, Sec. 52, A.M. No. 19-08-15-SC)² (Rule 130, Sec. 53, A.M. No. 19-08-15-SC)³

Requisites / Rules

• For expert opinion, the matter must require special knowledge, skill, experience, training, or education, and the witness must be shown to possess it. The opinion may then be received in evidence. (Rule 130, Sec. 52, A.M. No. 19-08-15-SC)²
• For an ordinary witness’s opinion on identity, the witness must have adequate knowledge of the person identified. For handwriting, the witness must have sufficient familiarity with it. (Rule 130, Sec. 53, A.M. No. 19-08-15-SC)³
• For an ordinary witness’s opinion on mental sanity, the witness must be sufficiently acquainted with the person concerned. The witness may also testify on impressions of a person’s emotion, behavior, condition, or appearance. A proper basis must be given for the opinion. (Rule 130, Sec. 53, A.M. No. 19-08-15-SC)³

Distinctions

Expert opinion addresses a matter requiring specialized qualifications; the ordinary witness’s permitted opinions concern the subjects specified in Section 53 and require the corresponding knowledge, familiarity, acquaintance, or other proper basis. The provisions do not make an ordinary witness’s opinion generally admissible merely because the witness can testify. (Rule 130, Sec. 52, A.M. No. 19-08-15-SC)² (Rule 130, Sec. 53, A.M. No. 19-08-15-SC)³ (Rule 130, Sec. 51, A.M. No. 19-08-15-SC)¹

Key doctrines

In Tortona v. Gregorio, the Court described trial courts as gatekeepers in assessing proffered expert scientific testimony. The factors identified include testability, peer review, error rate, standards controlling operation, and acceptance in the relevant scientific community. This concerns assessment of the expert testimony, not a replacement for Section 52’s requirement that the witness possess the relevant qualification. (Tortona v. Gregorio, G.R. No. 202612, 17 January 2018)⁴ (Rule 130, Sec. 52, A.M. No. 19-08-15-SC)²

In Dedicatoria v. Dedicatoria, the Court held that the absence of a personal examination or interview of the allegedly psychologically incapacitated spouse does not invalidate the expert’s findings. The Court considered the totality of the evidence, including the clinical psychologist’s testimony. Thus, absence of an interview alone should not be stated as an automatic bar to that expert’s findings. (Dedicatoria v. Ferdinand M. Dedicatoria and Republic of the Philippines, G.R. No. 250618, 20 July 2022)⁵

Exceptions

The exceptions to Section 51’s general exclusion are the expert opinion allowed by Section 52 and the ordinary witness’s specified opinions and impressions allowed by Section 53. In either setting, identify the applicable provision before arguing that the opinion may be received. (Rule 130, Sec. 51, A.M. No. 19-08-15-SC)¹ (Rule 130, Sec. 52, A.M. No. 19-08-15-SC)² (Rule 130, Sec. 53, A.M. No. 19-08-15-SC)³

Bar tip

Classify the opinion first: specialized matter under Section 52, or a specified ordinary-witness subject under Section 53. Then state the qualification or proper basis shown; do not stop at the witness’s conclusion. (Rule 130, Sec. 52, A.M. No. 19-08-15-SC)² (Rule 130, Sec. 53, A.M. No. 19-08-15-SC)³