1. 2. Nimfa's testimony is relevant.
   1. Tends to prove error of Colorado Court.
   2. Tends to prove that Colorado orders should not be enforced due to mistake of fact.
   3. Tends to prove that Defendant is not a proper party.
2. 3. Nimfa's testimony is material.
   1. Proves error of Court, hence foreign orders should not be enforced.
3. 1. Nera is not barred from presenting Nimfa's testimony.
   1. Rule 39, Section 48 allows evidence repelling foreign judgment
   2. Nera, in its "Answer", already stipulated the error made by the Colorado Court in that it should be Nera Singapore who should be impleaded and not Nera Philippines
   3. Nera, in its MTD, claimed that the Colorado Court had no jurisdiction over Nera
   4. Pre-Trial Order allows presentation of evidence to repel foreign order