A distinction between questions of law and questions of fact may not be defined by our rules of procedure or by our laws. However, our jurisprudence has the answer to our query. Read on.
G.R. No. 190994
September 7, 2011
TONGONAN HOLDINGSand DEVELOPMENTCORPORATION, Petitioner
- versus -
ATTY. FRANCISCO ESCAÑO, JR., Respondent.
In Republic of the Philippines v. Malabanan, this Court distinguished a question of law from a question of fact. A question of law arises when there is doubt as to what the law is on a certain state of facts, while there is a question of fact when the doubt arises as to the truth or falsity of the alleged facts. For a question to be one of law, the same must not involve an examination of the probative value of the evidence presented by the litigants or any of them. The resolution of the issue must rest solely on what the law provides on the given set of circumstances. Once it is clear that the issue invites a review of the evidence presented, the question posed is one of fact. Thus, the test of whether a question is one of law or of fact is not the appellation given to such question by the party raising the same; rather, it is whether the appellate court can determine the issue raised without reviewing or evaluating the evidence, in which case, it is a question of law; otherwise it is a question of fact.
