STATCON 8/13

1 A Study Guide in Statutory Construction: Cases and Materials by Atty. Jose Jesus G. Laurel (1990 ed.) Read Ch 8 2 Statutory Construction by Ruben E. Agpalo (2009 ed. ) Secs. 5.01 - the meaning of a word or phrase should be based primarily on the whole statute, secondarily from extraneous and relevant circumstances; in order to give effect to the legislative intent 5.02 - when the statute defines a word or phrase, then the meaning of thr statutory word or phrase is to be used regardless of thr ordinary meaning of the word. 5.03 - Qualification rule - "as used in this Act" means the statutory definition of the word or phrase is only controlling insofar that said Statute. 5.04 - a word or phrase is to be construed with its ordinanary meaning in the absence of legislative intent to the contrary "for words are presumed to have been employed by the lawmaker in their ordinary and common use and acceptation" 5.05 - generalia verba sunt generaliter intelligenda (what is generally spoken shall be generally understood). General over restricted sense, UNLESS nature of subject clearly indicates the restricted sense is intended. 5.16 - disjunctive and conjunctive words A. functions of "or": (1) the use between two phrases or words connotes that either phrase serves as qualifying word or phrase. "it is illegal to bring into or conceal or harbor any alien" means that bring into, coneal and harbor are distinct acts. (2) or used as and when the spirit of the law warrants. For example: "preliminary examination or investigation" means the lower court has jurisdicton to do both (3) or used as "that is to say" - "based on thr 'gross value in money' or 'actual market value'" the latter was to explain the former. (4) or used as succession "offended party or parents, grandparents or guardian..." means when one has filed a complaint, the other can no longer. B. functions of "and" (1) pertinently used as meaning "together with" (2) "and"a conjunctive word does not mean "or" a disjunctive word (3) restrict the meaning of the broad word when the restricted word is separated by "and" C. function of "and/or" - give effect to both the conjunctive and disjunctive purpose 8.06 - use of "shall" or "must" - directory in nature to confer that what is to be done is mandatory - EXCEPT when the legislative intent was to use it as merely directory. In order to ascertain if it is mandatory and not merely directory is when non-compliance means the act is null. 8.07 - use of "may" - connotes opportunity or possibility - directory in nature to confer discretion - only permissive, not mandatory 8.08 - when "shall" is construed as "may" and vice versa

- depending upon a consideration of the entire provision, its nature, its object and consequences from construing it in one form or another 4.19 - surplusage and superfluity disregarded - when a word, phrase, or clause in a statute is devoid of meaning in relation to the context or intent of the statute it can be rejected as surplusage and entirely ignored - surplusage does not vitiate or impair a statute (surplusagium non noceat) or the useful is not vitiated or impaired by the non-useful (utile per inutile non vitiatur) 6.11 - construction to avoid surplusage - the rule that should be given effect as a whole requires that the statute be so construed as to make no part or provision thereof a surplusage. - all efforts should be should be exerted to give some meaning to every word or phrase used in a statute since it is supposed that the legislature did not insert a provision that is unnecessary 3.07 - punctuation marks - can never control against the intelligible meaning of written words. An argument based on punctuation alone is not persuasive - however, when there is ambiguity, which may be partially or wholly solved by a punctuation mark, it may considered. - usually used to connote separation 3.08 illustration of 3.07 "if the charge against an employee involves dishonesty, oppression, or grave misconduct or neglect in the performance of a duty" - "in the performance of a duty" only applies to grave misconduct or neglect. Republic v. Toledano, 233 SCRA 9 (1994) Facts: - Respondent Evelyn Clouse, and her husband, wanted to adopt her younger brother - the Clouse couple are considered aliens since Alvin Clouse is a natural born citizen of the US while Evelyn, natural born Filipino, naturalized as a citizen of the US. - her brother, Joseph Alcala, gave his consent for the adoption along with his mother. In addition, the social welfare officer gave recommendation for the adoption as well. - respondent judge allowed the adoption. A petition was filed through the office of the Solicitor General contesting the decision due to questions of law Issue: Whether or not the respondent couple is allowed to adopt under Philippine Law Held: - NO. The respondent couple is not allowed to adopt since they are aliens who do not meet the any of the exceptions provided by the Family Code - an alien is not allowed to adopt, the exceptions to the rule are: (1) a former filipino citizen who wants to adopt a relative by consanguinity (2) one who seeks to adopt the legitimate child of his or her Filipino spouse (3) one who is married to a Filipino citizen who wants to adopt a relative of consanguinity of the latter. - Alvin Clouse does not meet any of those exceptions. On the other hand, Evelyn meets the first exception provided. However, it is also provided in the Family Code that a couple MUST adopt jointly, so the STATCON Principle is applied. Since Alvin cannot adopt, the couple cannot adopt. - the case also provided exceptions for joint adoption, which are: (1) those that want adopt their illegitimate child and (2) those that want to adopt legitimate child of his or her spouse. Since the one being adopted is the brother of Evelyn, they must adopt jointly. STATCON Principle: 8.06 - use of "shall" or "must" - directory in nature to confer that what is to be done is mandatory

Philippine Constitution Association v. Mathay, 18 SCRA 300 (1966) [only the main case and concurring opinion of J. Castro] Facts: - an increase in the salary of the members of the Senate and the House of Representatives was passed. - a year after the passing of the increase, when the full term of the Senate has not yet expired, the appropriations bill already increased the the salaries of the House members - the petitioners filed that the increase was violative of the Constitution Issue: Whether or not the increase in salaries can be applied when only the House of Representatives term has expired Held: - NO. The increase may only apply when the full term of both the House of Rep and the Senate have expired. - the Constitution provided that "no increase in salary shall take effect until after the expiration of the full term of all the members of the Senate AND of the House of Representatives approving such increase" - applying the STATCON Principle, both the terms of the Senate and House of Representatives must have expired. STATCON Principle: 5.16 - disjunctive and conjunctive words B. functions of "and" (1) pertinently used as meaning "together with" United States v. Hart, 26 Phil. 149 (1913) Facts: - all appellants have been found guilty of gambling, which is the basis of the petitioners for charging them for vagrancy - the defense provided that all appellants have means to support themselves - a vagrant was defined to be "anyone found loitering about saloons, dram shops, or gambling houses, or straying through the country without visible means of support" Issue: Whether or not the respondents can be considered vagrants even though they have means of support Held: - NO. They cannot be considered as vagrants. The clause that vagrant loitering those areas should not have a visible means of support. To say that it does not apply means that there are two classification of vagrants under one clause separated by semicolon. - and to say that those who can support themselves but who loiter around the places provided are vagrants means anyone who goes to those places are vagrants automatically. STATCON Principle: 3.07 - punctuation marks - can never control against the intelligible meaning of written words. An argument based on punctuation alone is not persuasive