This case has been cited 2 times or more.
|
2015-07-01 |
MENDOZA, J. |
||||
| Fraud must be proven by clear and convincing evidence and not merely by a preponderance thereof.[46] Clear and convincing proof is more than mere preponderance, but not to extent of such certainty as is required beyond reasonable doubt as in criminal cases.[47] The imputation of fraud in a civil case requires the presentation of clear and convincing evidence. Mere allegations will not suffice to sustain the existence of fraud. The burden of evidence rests on the part of the plaintiff or the party alleging fraud.[48] | |||||
|
2015-06-17 |
BERSAMIN, J. |
||||
| Firstly, Centro Project’s allegation on the expiration date being merely inserted by the Philippine representative in Northern Marianas was not substantiated with credible proof. It supported its allegation by alluding to the fact that the signature of the person who had verified the employment contract was similar to the handwritten insertion made on the blank space of the employment contract. That was not enough, however, in view of the basic rule that mere allegation is not evidence and is not equivalent to proof.[18] Hence, the allegation, an essentially self-serving statement, was devoid of any evidentiary weight. | |||||