COURSE OUTLINE STATUTORY CONSTRUCTION Atty. Ma. Cecilia D.

Papa Lyceum of the Philippines University College of Law First Semester SY 2013-2014 REFERENCE MATERIALS: Agpalo, Ruben, Statutory Construction, 2003, 5th Edition, Rex Printing Co., Man ila. Alcantara, Samson, Statutes. (1993 Ed.) The Philippines Labor Relations Journa l, Quezon City. Funa, Dennis B., Canons of Statutory Construction, 2011, 1st Edition I. INTRODUCTION A. The Case Method

Figuerroa v. Barranco, Jr., 276 SCRA 445 [1977] Republic v. Court of Appeals, 268 SCRA 198 [1997] People v. Jalosjos, 369 SCRA 179 [2001] B. The Philippine Legal System

- An overview II. STATUTES AND THEIR ENACTMENT A. Definition of Statutes as against Laws Agpalo, pp. 1-2 B. Classification of Statutes Agpalo, pp. 2-3; Alcantara, pp. 1-3 C. Parts of a Statute and Rules on Legislative Drafting Agpalo, pp. 11-16 1. TitleConsti., Art. VI, Sec. 26(1) Lidasan vs. COMELEC, 21 SCRA 496 2. 3. 4. 5. D. Enacting Clause Preamble Purview Other Clauses Steps in the Enactment of the Statute 1987 Consti., Art. VI, secs. 26 & 27 Senate Rules and House of Representatives Rules E. Evidence of Due Enactment of Statutes

1.

Enrolled Bill Theory Agpalo, p.9-10

Mabanag vs. Lopez Vito, 78 Phil. 1 Casco Phil. V. Gimenez, 7 SCRA 347 Morales vs. Subido, 26 SCRA 150 2. Journal Entry Rule 1987 Consti., Art. VI, Sec. 16(4); sec. 26 (2); sec. 27(1) Agpalo, p. 8 Astorga vs. Villegas, 56 SCRA 714 F. Power to construe and determine validity of the statutes Agpalo, pp.25-51 1. 2. Initial presumption of validity and constitutionality Requisites for exercise of judicial power

3. Test of constitutionality 4. Effect of unconstitutionality

Tatad vs. Secretary of Dept. of Energy, 281 SCRA 330 [1997] Commissioner of Internal Revenue vs. Court of Appeals, 302 SCRA 442 [1999] III. EFFECT AND APPLICATION OF STATUTES A. When statutes/regulations become effective

Agpalo, 16-25, 41-47 Civil Code, Art. 2 as amended by Exec. Order No. 200 (1987), cf. Adm. Code of 1987, s. 18, Chapter V Rev. Adm. Code, sec. 551 Taada vs. Tuvera, 136 SCRA 27 and 146 SCRA 446 People vs. Que Po Lay, 94 Phil. 640 B. Prospective or retrospective operation of statutes

Rev. Penal Code, Art. 22 Adm. Code of 1987, sec. 19 Agpalo, Chap. IX, 351-386 Alcantara, pp.175-187 Echegaray vs. Secretary of Justice, 301 SCRA 96 [1999] Cf. People vs. Echegaray, 267 SCRA 682 [1998] Ortigas Ltd. Vs. Court of Appeals, 346 SCRA 748 [2000] C. General versus special Agpalo, pp. 276-280

Lapid vs. Court of Appeals, 334 SCRA 738 [2000] Langkaan Realty vs. UCPB, 347 SCRA 542 [2000] PNOC vs. CA, 457 SCRA 32 [2005] D. Strict or liberal construction of statutes Alcantara, 162-173; Agpalo, 285-328 People vs. Ladjaalam, 340 SCRA 617 [2000] Semirara Coal Corp. vs. Secretary of Labor, 309 SCRA 292 [1999] E. Mandatory or permissive/directory statutes Alcantara, pp. 171-173; Agpalo, Chapter VIII, pp. 329-348 IV. AMENDMENT, REVISIONS AND REPEALS Agpalo, pp.387-431; Alcantara, pp. 175-206 Rev. Admi. Code, Chapter 15. Sec. 21. No Implied Revival of Repealed Law. -- When a law which expressly rep eals a prior law is itself repealed, the law first repeaed shall not be thereby revived unless expressly so provided. Sec. 22. Revival of Law Impliedly Repealed. When a law which impliedly repeals a prior law is itself repealed, the prior law shall thereby be revived, unless t he repealing law provides otherwise. A. Amendments

Akbayan Youth s. COMELEC, 355 SCRA 318 [2001] People vs. Macoy, 338 SCRA 217 [2000] B. Revisions and Re-enactments Department of Agrarian Reform vs. Sutton, 473 SCRA 392 [2005] C. Repeals Adm. Code of 1987, secs. 21-22 RA 7659; RA 8177 RA 9346, June 24, 2006 (death penalty abolished) Alunan vs. Asuncion, 323 SCRA 623 [2000] Commisioner of Internal Revenue vs. Primetown Property Group, Inc. 531 SCRA 436 (2008) V. NATURE AND CONCEPT OF STATUTORY CONSTRUCTION (intent vs. purpose) Agpalo, Chap. II, pp. 48-75 Matabuena vs. Cervantes, 38 SCRA 284 CIR vs. S. C. Johnson & Sons, 309 SCRA 87 [1999] De Guzman vs. Sison, 355 SCRA 69 [2001] VI. OBJECT AND METHODS OF CONSTRUCTION

AND DETERMINING LEGISLATIVE INTENT Agpalo, Chap. II, pp.52-55; Chap. IV, pp. 124-176 1. Verba legis or literal interpretation (Plain meaning rule)

Colgate Palmolive vs. Gimenez, 1 SCRA 267 Baylon vs. Court of Appeals, 312 SCRA 502 Signey vs. Social Security System 542 SCRA 629 2. Ratio legis or interpretation by considering spirit and intent of law (Golden rule) Agpalo, pp 88; 131-141 MCC Industrial Sales Corp. vs. Ssangyong Corporation 536 SCRA 408 (2008) 3. Mens legislatoris (Mischief rule) Agpalo, p.90 Macabenta vs. Davao Stevedore, 32 SCRA 553 4. Equity of the statute; Statutory Construction vs. Judicial Legislation Civil Code, Arts. 9-10 Floresca vs. Philex Mining Corp. 136 SCRA 142 VII. INTERPRETATION AND CONSTRUCTION IN RELATION TO THE LANGUAGE OF THE STATUTE (INTRINSIC AIDS) Agpalo, Chap. VI; Alcantara, Chap. III A. Common meaning rule

Song Kiat Chocolate Factory vs. Central Bank, 102 SCRA 510 Bagong Alyansang Makabayan (BAYAN) vs. Zamora, 342 SCRA 449 [2000] Cf.: CONSEQUENTIAL ANALYSIS OR ABSURDITY RULE Lina Obana y Zamora vs. Judge Andres Soriano, RTC-Br. 13, Malolos and Jaime Lir on, CA G.R. Sp. No. 60353, 29 Aug. 2001 Santos, Jr. vs. PNOC Exploration Corporation 566 SCRA 272 B. Terms with legal meaning Bernardo vs. Bernardo, 96 Phil. 202 People vs. Dela Cuesta, 304 SCRA 83 [1999] C. Terms with multiple meaning Santulan vs. Exec. Sec., 80 SCRA 548 D. Doctrine of associated words (noscitur a sociis)

People vs. Santiago, 5 SCRA 231 Coca-Cola Bottlers, Phils.,Inc. vs. Gomez, 571 SCRA 18 E. Ejusdem Generis rule Mutuc vs. COMELEC, 36 SCRA 228 Gaanan vs. IAC, 145 SCRA 112 F. Expressio unius est exclusio alterius rule

Santos To vs. Cruz Pano, 120 SCRA 8 Go-Tan vs. Tan, 567 SCRA 231 G. Casus Omissus People vs. Manantan, 5 SCRA 684 H. Redendo singula singulis Amadora vs. Court of Appeals 160 SCRA 315 (1988) I. Doctrine of last antecedent Mapa vs. Arroyo, 175 SCRA 76 (1989) J. Ubi lex non distinguit nec nos distinguere debemos

MTRCB vs. ABS Broadcasting Corp., 448 SCRA 575 Guerrero vs. Commission on Elections, 336 SCRA 458 [2000] K. Doctrine of necessary implication Agpalo, Chapter IV, pp 164-176 Chua vs. Civil Service Commission, 206 SCRA 65 L. Verbal or clerical errors Rufino Lopez vs. CTA, 100 Phil. 850 M. Number, Gender and Tense Santillon vs. Miranda, 14 SCRA 563 N. Conjunctive and disjunctive words

Romulo Mabanta Law vs. Home Development Mutual Fund, 333 SCRA 777 [2000] Lanaria vs. Planta 538 SCRA 79 (2008) O. Shall and may Bersabal vs. Salvador, 84 SCRA 176 Don Tino Realty vs. Florentino, 314 SCRA 197 [1999] ###