Statutory Construction END Law Notes PDF

Statutory Construction Reviewer
By: Ernesto N. Dayao, Jr., CPA END Law Notes
Definition of Statutory Construction The Court should not assume the role of
legislator. (Floresca v. Philex – dissenting
“Statutory construction” is the art or process opinion of Justice Gutierrez)4
of discovering and expounding the meaning
and intention of the authors of the law with Strict v. Liberal Construction
respect to its application to a given case,
where that intention is rendered doubtful, The liberal construction of a law should not
among others, by reason of the fact that the be countenanced if it is clear and
given case is not explicitly provided for in the unambiguous.
law.
In the case of Fetalino v. COMELEC,5 the
The absence of a statutory definition of a Court denied the petitioners’ appeal to liberal
term used in a statute will not render the law construction of Section 1 of R.A. No. 1568 is
void for vagueness, if the meaning can be misplaced since the law is clear and
determined through the judicial function of unambiguous. We emphasize that the
construction. Elementary is the principle that primary modality of addressing the present
words should be construed in their ordinary case is to look into the provisions of the
and usual meaning. (Romualdez v. retirement law itself. Guided by the rules of
Sandiganbayan)1 statutory construction in this consideration,
we find that the language of the retirement
This conclusion firms up in the light of the law is clear and unequivocal; no room for
mischief sought to be remedied by the law, construction or interpretation exists, only the
resort to the determination thereof being an application of the letter of the law.
accepted extrinsic aid in statutory
construction. (Caltex Inc. v. Palomar)2 Also, in the case of Legaspi v. Creative Play,6
the Court denied the invocation of liberal
Nature of the Rules of Statutory application of the rules of court when the
Construction petitioner transgressed procedural rules due
to belated filing of a petition.
The basic canon of statutory interpretation is
that the word used in the law must be given Lastly, in the case of People v. Veneracion,7
its ordinary meaning, unless a contrary intent the Court denied the liberal interpretation of
is manifest from the law itself. (PCFI v. NTC)3 criminal law because it is clear under the law,
that the penalty imposable for the crime of
Judiciary’s Role in Statutory Rape with Homicide is not Reclusion
Construction Perpetua but Death.
The duty of the court is to settle actual The provision leaves no room for the
controversies involving rights which are exercise of discretion on the part of the trial
legally demandable and enforceable and judge to impose a penalty under the
determine whether or not there has been a circumstances described, other than a
grave abuse of discretion amounting to lack sentence of death. Hence, the petition was
or excess of jurisdiction on any part or branch granted and the Court remanded the case to
of the government. the trial court for proper imposition of the
penalty.
1 G.R. No. 152259, July 29, 2004 5 G.R. No. 191890, December 4, 2012
2 G.R. No. L-19650, September 29, 1966 6 G.R. No. 169942, January 24, 2011
3 G.R. No. L-63318, August 18, 1984 7 G.R. Nos. 119987-88, October 12, 1995
4 G.R. No. L-30642, April 30, 1985
Whatever you do, work at it with all your heart, as working for the Lord, not for men.
(Colossians 3:23)
What is Judicial Legislation? Also, it was held in the case of Fort Bonifacio
Development Corporation v. CIR,10 that as
The Court should give Congress a chance to mandated by Article 7 of the Civil Code, an
perform its primordial duty of lawmaking. The administrative rule or regulation cannot
Court should not pre-empt Congress and contravene the law on which it is based. RR
usurp its inherent powers of making and 7-95 is inconsistent with Section 105 insofar
enacting laws. While it may be the most as the definition of the term "goods" is
expeditious approach, a short cut by judicial concerned. This is a legislative act beyond
fiat is a dangerous proposition, lest the Court the authority of the CIR and the Secretary of
dare trespass on prohibited judicial Finance. The rules and regulations that
legislation. (Corpuz v. People)8 administrative agencies promulgate, which
are the product of a delegated legislative
In the case of Floresca v. Philex Mining,9 the power to create new and additional legal
Court ruled that there is no judicial legislation provisions that have the effect of law, should
because it only applied and gave effect to the be within the scope of the statutory authority
constitutional guarantees of social justice granted by the legislature to the objects and
then secured by Section 5 of Article 11 and purposes of the law, and should not be in
Section 6 of Article XIV of the 1935 contradiction to, but in conformity with, the
Constitution when it ruled that awarding standards prescribed by law.
compensation under the Workmen's
Compensation Act differs from that in giving To be valid, an administrative rule or
damages under the Civil Code. regulation must conform, not contradict, the
provisions of the enabling law. An
In case of any doubt which may be implementing rule or regulation cannot
engendered by Article 173 of the New Labor modify, expand, or subtract from the law it is
Code, both the New Labor Code and the Civil intended to implement. Any rule that is not
Code direct that the doubts should be consistent with the statute itself is null and
resolved in favor of the workers and void.
employees.
While administrative agencies, such as the
Thus, Article 4 of the New Labor Code, Bureau of Internal Revenue, may issue
otherwise known as Presidential Decree No. regulations to implement statutes, they are
442, as amended, promulgated on May 1, without authority to limit the scope of the
1974, but which took effect six months statute to less than what it provides, or
thereafter, provides that "all doubts in the extend or expand the statute beyond its
implementation and interpretation of the terms, or in any way modify explicit
provisions of this Code, including its provisions of the law. Indeed, a quasi-judicial
implementing rules and regulations, shall be body or an administrative agency for that
resolved in favor of labor" (Art. 2, Labor matter cannot amend an act of Congress.
Code). Hence, in case of a discrepancy between the
basic law and an interpretative or
Article 10 of the New Civil Code states: "In administrative ruling, the basic law prevails.
case of doubt in the interpretation or
application of laws, it is presumed that the To recapitulate, RR 7-95, insofar as it
law-making body intended right and justice to restricts the definition of "goods" as basis of
prevail." transitional input tax credit under Section 105
is a nullity.
8 G.R. No. 180016, April 29, 2014 10 G.R. No. 173425, September 4, 2012
9 G.R. No. L-30642, April 30, 1985
(Colossians 3:23)
Lastly, in the case of Corpuz v. People,11 the legis in all that time and that no bond shall be
Court ruled that with regard to the necessity admitted for the release of it.
of demand, it agreed with the CA that
demand under this kind of estafa need not be When Does Statutory Construction Come
formal or written. In?
When the law does not qualify, We should It has been repeated time and time again that
not qualify. Should a written demand be where the statutory norm speaks
necessary, the law would have stated so. unequivocally, there is nothing for the courts
Otherwise, the word "demand" should be to do except to apply it. The law, leaving no
interpreted in its general meaning as to doubt as to the scope of its operation, must
include both written and oral demand. Thus, be obeyed. Our decisions have consistently
the failure of the prosecution to present a born to that effect. (Kapisanan ng mga
written demand as evidence is not fatal. Manggagawa sa Manila Railroad Company
Credit Union, Inc. v. Manila Railroad
Fundamental Rule in the Construction of Company)13
Statutes
In the case of National Federation of Labor v.
A statute must be read according to its spirit Eisma,14 the Court ruled that Article 217 is to
or intent, for what is within the spirit is within be applied the way it is worded. The
the statute although it is not within its letter, exclusive original jurisdiction of a labor
and that which is within the letter but not arbiter is therein provided for explicitly. It
within the spirit is not within the statute. Put a means, it can only mean, that a court of first
bit differently, that which is within the intent of instance judge then, a regional trial court
the lawmaker is as much within the statute as judge now, certainly acts beyond the scope
if within the letter, and that which is within the of the authority conferred on him by law when
letter of the statute is not within the statute he entertained the suit for damages, arising
unless within the intent of the lawmakers. from picketing that accompanied a strike.
Withal, courts ought not to interpret and That was squarely within the express terms
should not accept an interpretation that of the law. Any deviation cannot therefore be
would defeat the intent of the law and its tolerated.
legislators.
Also in the case of Daoang v. Mun. Judge of
In the case of PDEA v. Brodett,12 the Court San Nicolas,15 the Court held that the words
ruled that the ordering the release of the car used in paragraph (1) of Art. 335 of the Civil
at that point of the proceedings was Code, in enumerating the persons who
premature, considering that the third cannot adopt, are clear and unambiguous.
paragraph of Section 20, supra, expressly The children mentioned therein have a
forbids the disposition, alienation, or transfer clearly defined meaning in law and, as
of any property, or income derived therefrom, pointed out by the respondent judge, do not
that has been confiscated from the accused include grandchildren.
charged under R.A. No. 9165 during the
pendency of the proceedings in the Regional Well known is the rule of statutory
Trial Court. Section 20 further expressly construction to the effect that a statute clear
requires that such property or income and unambiguous on its face need not be
derived therefrom should remain in custodia interpreted; stated otherwise, the rule is that
only statutes with an ambiguous or doubtful
11 G.R. No. 180016, April 29, 2014 14 G.R. No. L-61236, January 31, 1984
12 G.R. No. 196390, September 28, 2011 15 G.R. No. L-34568, March 28, 1988
13 G.R. No. L-25316, February 28, 1979
(Colossians 3:23)
meaning may be the subject of statutory election only, and not to motions for
construction. interventions.
Adoption used to be for the benefit of the Also, in the case of San Miguel Corporation
adoptor. It was intended to afford to persons v. Inciong,19 the Court ruled that under
who have no child of their own the Presidential Decree 851 and its
consolation of having one, by creating implementing rules, the basic salary of an
through legal fiction, the relation of paternity employee is used as the basis in the
and filiation where none exists by blood determination of his 13th-month pay. Any
relationship. The present tendency, compensations or remunerations which are
however, is geared more towards the deemed not part of the basic pay is excluded
promotion of the welfare of the child and the as basis in the computation of the mandatory
enhancement of his opportunities for a useful bonus.
and happy life, and every intendment is
sustained to promote that objective. Under In the case of Insular Bank of Asia and
the law now in force, having legitimate, America Employees Union v. Inciong,20 the
legitimated, acknowledged natural children, Court held that the provisions of the Labor
or children by legal fiction, is no longer a Code on the entitlement to the benefits of
ground for disqualification to adopt. holiday pay are clear and explicit - it provides
for both the coverage of and exclusion from
Lastly, in the case of People v. Mapa,16 the the benefits. In Policy Instruction No. 9, the
Court ruled that the law, regarding illegal then Secretary of Labor went as far as to
possession of fire arms, cannot be any categorically state that the benefit is
clearer. No provision is made for a secret principally intended for daily paid employees,
agent. As such he is not exempt. Our task is when the law clearly states that every worker
equally clear. The first and fundamental duty shall be paid their regular holiday pay. This is
of courts is to apply the law. "Construction a flagrant violation of the mandatory directive
and interpretation come only after it has been of Article 4 of the Labor Code, which states
demonstrated that application is impossible that "All doubts in the implementation and
or inadequate without them." Hence, the interpretation of the provisions of this Code,
conviction of the accused must stand. It including its implementing rules and
cannot be set aside. regulations, shall be resolved in favor of
labor." Moreover, it shall always be
Rule on Executive Construction presumed that the legislature intended to
enact a valid and permanent statute which
It is elementary in the rules of statutory would have the most beneficial effect that its
construction that when the language of the language permits (Orlosky vs. Haskell, 155
law is clear and unequivocal the law must be A. 112.)
taken to mean exactly what it says. (Insular
Bank of Asia and America Employees Union Lastly, in the case of Navarro v. Executive
v. Inciong)17 Secretary,21 the Court held that State policies
are the very reason for the enactment of the
In the case of PAFLU v. BLR,18 the Court Local Government Code (LGC), with the
dismissed the petition of PAFLU on the view to attain decentralization and
ground that it is crystal clear from the countryside development. Congress saw
provisions that written consent of the that the old LGC, Batas Pambansa Bilang
employees only applies to certification 337, had to be replaced with a new law, now
16 G.R. No. L-22301, August 30, 1967 19 G.R. No. L-49774, February 24, 1981
17 G.R. No. L-52415, October 23, 1984 20 G.R. No. L-52415, October 23, 1984
18 G.R. No. 79347, January 26, 1989 21 G.R. No. 180050, April 12, 2011
(Colossians 3:23)
the LGC of 1991, which is more dynamic and Sociis) provides that where a particular word
cognizant of the needs of the Philippines as or phrase in a statement is ambiguous in
an archipelagic country. This accounts for itself or is equally susceptible of various
the exemption from the land area meanings, its true meaning may be made
requirement of local government units clear and specific by considering the
composed of one or more islands, as company in which it is found or with which it
expressly stated under Sections 442 and 450 is associated. (Aisporna v. CA)24
of the LGC, with respect to the creation of
municipalities and cities, but inadvertently It is a rule of statutory construction that "when
omitted from Section 461 with respect to the the language of a particular section of a
creation of provinces. Hence, the void or statute admits of more than one construction,
missing detail was filled in by the Oversight that construction which gives effect to the
Committee in the LGC-IRR. evident purpose and object sought to be
attained by the enactment of the statute as a
How to Ascertain Legislative Intent? whole, must be followed." A statute's clauses
and phrases should not be taken as
Intention of the legislator must be detached and isolated expressions, but the
ascertained, not from the consideration of a whole and every part thereof must be
single word or a particular phrase of the law, considered in fixing the meaning of any of its
but from the context of the whole law or from parts. (Sanciangco v. Rono)25
a portion thereof as compared with the
whole. (Lopez v. El Hogar Filipino)22 Legislative intent regarding certain laws:
The rule is that all the provisions of the law 1. Veteran Pension Law
even if apparently contradictory, should be
allowed to stand and given effect by Veteran pension law which must be
reconciling them if necessary. Consequently, accorded a liberal construction and
each part of section should be construed in interpretation in order to favor those
connection with every other part or section so entitled to the rights, privileges and
as to produce a harmonious whole. (Araneta benefits granted thereunder, among
v. Conception)23 which are the right to resume old
positions in the government,
A statute must be so construed as to educational benefits, the privilege to
harmonize and give effect to all its provisions take promotional examinations, a life
whenever possible. The meaning of the law, pension for the incapacitated,
it must be borne in mind, is not to be pensions for widow and children,
extracted from any single part, portion or hospitalization and medical care
section or from isolated words and phrases, benefits.
clauses or sentences but from a general
consideration or view of the act as a whole. The purpose of Congress in granting
Every part of the statute must be interpreted veteran pensions is to compensate,
with reference to the context. This means as far as may be, a class of men who
that every part of the statute must be suffered in the service for the
considered together with the other parts, and hardships they endured and the
kept subservient to the general intent of the dangers they encountered, and more
whole enactment, not separately and particularly, those who have become
independently. More importantly, the incapacitated for work owing to
doctrine of associated words (Noscitur a sickness, disease or injuries
22 G.R. No. L-22678, January 12, 1925 24 G.R. No. L-39419, April 12, 1982
23 G.R. No. L-9667, July 31, 1956 25 G.R. No. L-68709, July 19, 1985
(Colossians 3:23)
sustained while in line of duty. A

veteran pension law is, therefore, a
governmental expression of gratitude
to and recognition of those who
rendered service for the country,
especially during times of war or
revolution, by extending to them
regular monetary aid. For this reason,
it is the general rule that a liberal
construction is given to pension
statutes in favor of those entitled to
pension. Courts tend to favor the
pensioner, but such constructional
preference is to be considered with
other guides to interpretation, and a
construction of pension laws must
depend on its own particular
language. (Board of Administrators v.
Bautista)26
2. Dangerous Drugs Act
In order to effectively fulfill the intent

of the law to rehabilitate drug users,
this Court thus calls on law enforcers
and prosecutors in dangerous drugs
cases to exercise proper discretion in
filing charges when the presence of
dangerous drugs is only and solely in
the form of residue and the
confirmatory test required under Sec.
15 is positive for use of dangerous
drugs. In such cases, to afford the
accused a chance to be rehabilitated,
the filing of charges for or involving
possession of dangerous drugs
should only be done when another
separate quantity of dangerous
drugs, other than mere residue, is
found in the possession of the
accused as provided for in Sec. 15.
To file charges under Sec. 11 on the
basis of residue alone would frustrate
the objective of the law to rehabilitate
drug users and provide them with an
opportunity to recover for a second
chance at life. (People v. Martinez)27
26 G.R. No. L-37867, February 22, 1982 27 G.R. No. 191366, December 13, 2010
(Colossians 3:23)
Subjects of Constructions: as already pointed out, while the 1935

Constitution includes "heads of bureaus"
1. Constitution; among those officers whose appointments
2. Statutes; need the consent of the Commission on
3. Ordinances; and Appointments, the 1987 Constitution on the
4. Presidential Decree other hand, deliberately excluded the
position of "heads of bureaus" from
1. Constitution appointments that need the consent
(confirmation) of the Commission on
Is the issuing and selling postage stamps Appointments.
commemorative of the Thirty-third
International Eucharistic Congress a The power to appoint is fundamentally
violation of the constitutional principle of executive or presidential in character.
separation of church and state? Limitations on or qualifications of such power
should be strictly construed against them.
No. It was held by the Court in the case of Such limitations or qualifications must be
Aglipay v. Ruiz,28 that the issuance of the clearly stated in order to be recognized. But,
postage stamps in question by the Director of it is only in the first sentence of Sec. 16, Art.
Posts and the Secretary of Public Works and VII where it is clearly stated that
Communications was not inspired by any appointments by the President to the
sectarian denomination. The stamps were positions therein enumerated require the
not issue and sold for the benefit of the consent of the Commission on
Roman Catholic Church. Nor were money Appointments.
derived from the sale of the stamps given to
that church. On the contrary, it appears from Is the imposition of income tax to the
the latter of the Director of Posts of June 5, salary of judges or justices constitute
1936, incorporated on page 2 of the diminution of benefits in violation of the
petitioner's complaint that the only purpose in Constitution?
issuing and selling the stamps was "to
advertise the Philippines and attract more In the case of Perfecto v. Meer,30 the Court
tourist to this country." The officials ruled that the undiminishable character of
concerned merely, took advantage of an judicial salaries is not a mere privilege of
event considered of international importance judges — personal and therefore waivable —
"to give publicity to the Philippines and its but a basic limitation upon legislative or
people." executive action imposed in the public
interest. Hence, not subject to any
Is it required, under the Constitution, for diminution. Also, it was also confirmed in the
the “Heads of Bureau” (ex. Bureau of case of Endencia v. David,31 that when a
Customs) to be confirmed by the judicial officer assumed office, he does not
Commission on Appointments? exactly ask for exemption from payment of
income tax on his salary, as a privilege. It is
No. The Court held in the case of Sarmiento already attached to his office, provided and
III v. Mison,29 that it is evident that the secured by the fundamental law, not
position of Commissioner of the Bureau of primarily for his benefit, but based on public
Customs (a bureau head) is not one of those interest, to secure and preserve his
within the first group of appointments where independence of judicial thought and action.
the consent of the Commission on
Appointments is required. As a matter of fact,
28 G.R. No. L-45459, March 13, 1937 30 G.R. No. L-2348, February 27, 1950
29 G.R. No. 79974, December 17, 1987 31 G.R. No. L-6355-56, August 31, 1953
(Colossians 3:23)
However, in the case of Nitafan v. CIR,32 the specifically providing for the appointment of
non-taxability of salaries of judges and Supreme Court Justices. In particular,
justices was laid to rest when the Court held Section 9 states that the appointment of
that the intent of the framers of the 1987 Supreme Court Justices can only be made
Constitution was to make the salaries of by the President upon the submission of a list
members of the Judiciary taxable (the phrase of at least three nominees by the JBC;
“nor subjected to income tax” was deleted). Section 4(1) of the Article mandates the
The ascertainment of that intent is but in President to fill the vacancy within 90 days
keeping with the fundamental principle of from the occurrence of the vacancy.
constitutional construction that the intent of
the framers of the organic law and of the Had the framers intended to extend the
people adopting it should be given effect. prohibition contained in Section 15, Article
VII to the appointment of Members of the
Is the President prohibited to appoint a Supreme Court, they could have explicitly
Chief Justice two months immediately done so. They could not have ignored the
before the coming of the next Presidential meticulous ordering of the provisions. They
election? would have easily and surely written the
prohibition made explicit in Section 15,
No. In the case of De Castro v. Judicial Bar Article VII as being equally applicable to the
Council,33 the Court held that the prohibition appointment of Members of the Supreme
under Section 15, Article VII does not apply Court in Article VIII itself, most likely in
to appointments to fill a vacancy in the Section 4 (1), Article VIII. That such
Supreme Court or to other appointments to specification was not done only reveals that
the Judiciary. the prohibition against the President or
Acting President making appointments within
The records of the deliberations of the two months before the next presidential
Constitutional Commission reveal that the elections and up to the end of the Presidents
framers devoted time to meticulously or Acting Presidents term does not refer to
drafting, styling, and arranging the the Members of the Supreme Court.
Constitution. Such meticulousness indicates
that the organization and arrangement of the Given the background and rationale for the
provisions of the Constitution were not prohibition in Section 15, Article VII, we have
arbitrarily or whimsically done by the framers, no doubt that the Constitutional Commission
but purposely made to reflect their intention confined the prohibition to appointments
and manifest their vision of what the made in the Executive Department. The
Constitution should contain. framers did not need to extend the prohibition
to appointments in the Judiciary, because
As can be seen, Article VII is devoted to the their establishment of the JBC and their
Executive Department, and, among others, it subjecting the nomination and screening of
lists the powers vested by the Constitution in candidates for judicial positions to the
the President. The presidential power of unhurried and deliberate prior process of the
appointment is dealt with in Sections 14, 15 JBC ensured that there would no longer be
and 16 of the Article. midnight appointments to the Judiciary.
Article VIII is dedicated to the Judicial Indeed, it is axiomatic in statutory

Department and defines the duties and construction that the ascertainment of the
qualifications of Members of the Supreme purpose of the enactment is a step in the
Court, among others. Section 4(1) and process of ascertaining the intent or meaning
Section 9 of this Article are the provisions of the enactment, because the reason for the
32 G.R. No. 78780, July 23, 1987 33 G.R. No. 191002, March 17, 2010
(Colossians 3:23)
enactment must necessarily shed Applies only to a specific person or

considerable light on the law of the statute, subject.
i.e., the intent; hence, the enactment should
be construed with reference to its intended Kinds of Statutes as to Application:
scope and purpose, and the court should
seek to carry out this purpose rather than to 1. Mandatory Law
defeat it.
Law which commands that
2. Statutes something be done.
Definition of “Statute” 2. Prohibitory Law
Statute is the written will of the legislature Law which commands that
solemnly expressed in according to form something should not be done.
necessary to constitute it as the law of the
state. Kinds of Statutes as to Performance and
Effectivity:
Kinds of Statutes as to Scope:
1. Permanent
1. General Law
One whose operation is not limited in
Applies to the whole state and duration but continues until repealed.
operates throughout the state alike
upon all people or all of a class. (Ex. 2. Temporary
Civil Code of the Philippines, Tax
Code, Labor Code, etc.) Duration is for a limited period of time
fixed in the statute itself or whose life
2. Special Law ceases upon the happening of an
event.
Relates to particular person or things
of a class or to a particular Kinds of Statutes as to Purpose and
community, individual or thing. (Ex. Nature:
Violence Against Women and
Children Act, etc.) 1. Penal
3. Local Law A statute that defines criminal

offenses and specify corresponding
A law which relates or operates over fines and punishments.
a particular locality instead of over the
whole territory of the state. (Ex. 2. Remedial
Ordinances, etc.)
A statute providing means or method
Kinds of Statutes as to Interested Parties: whereby causes of action may be
effectuated, wrongs redressed and
1. Public Law relief obtained.
Affects the public at large. 3. Curative
2. Private Law A form of retrospective legislation

which reaches back into the past to
operate upon past events, acts or
(Colossians 3:23)
transactions in order to correct errors 1. Title

and irregularities and to render valid
and effective many attempted acts Heading of the preliminary part,
which otherwise be ineffective for the furnishing the name by which the act
purpose intended. is individually known.
As a general rule, can a law be applied In the case of City of Baguio v.

retrospectively? Marcos,35 the Court ruled in favor of
the respondent who sought to reopen
The court held in the case of Castro v. the cadastral proceedings because
Sagales,34 that statute does not thereby the law itself (R.A. 931), by reading its
operate retroactively; it is made to operate title, expressly gave them the right to
upon claims formulated after the law's institute such case.
approval.
The Court also ruled in the case of
"A retrospective law, in a legal sense, is one Ebarle v. Sucaldito,36 that the reliance
which takes away or impairs vested rights of the petitioner-governor to
acquired under existing laws, or creates a Executive Order No. 264 should not
new obligation and imposes a new duty, or be countenanced. The very title of EO
attaches a new disability, in respect of 264 speaks of "COMMISSION OF
transactions or consideration already past. IRREGULARITIES." There is no
Hence, remedial statutes, or statutes relating mention, not even by implication, of
to remedies or modes of procedure, which do criminal "offenses," that is to say,
not create new or take away vested rights, "crimes." While "crimes" amount to
but only operate in furtherance of the remedy "irregularities," the Executive Order
or confirmation of rights already existing, do could have very well referred to the
not come within the legal conception of a more specific term had it intended to
retrospective law, or the general rule against make itself applicable thereto.
the retrospective operation of statutes" Therefore, it is plain from the very
wording of the Order that it has
It is argued that Republic Act No. 772 should exclusive application to
not be enforced as to accidents happening administrative, not criminal
before its approval, because it has complaints.
introduced changes affecting vested rights of
the parties. Without going into details, it Also, in the case of Lidasan v.
might be admitted that changes as to Commission on Elections,37 the Court
substantive rights will not govern such invalidated Republic Act No. 4790
"previous" accidents. Yet here we are because it has a defective title. The
dealing with remedies and jurisdiction which Court held that the subject of the
the Legislature has power to determine and statute must be "expressed in the
apportion. And then it is hard to imagine how title" of the bill. This constitutional
one litigant could acquire a vested right to be requirement "breathes the spirit of
heard by one particular court, even before he command." Compliance is
has submitted himself to that particular imperative, given the fact that the
court's jurisdiction. Constitution does not exact of
Congress the obligation to read
Parts of a Statute: during its deliberations the entire text
of the bill. In fact, in the case of House
34 G.R. No. L-6359, December 29, 1953 36 G.R. No. L-33628, December 29, 1987
35 G.R. No. L-26100, February 28, 1969 37 G.R. No. L-28089, October 25, 1967
(Colossians 3:23)
Bill 1247, which became Republic Act persons interested, should be kept in
4790, only its title was read from its mind by the court.
introduction to its final approval in the
House of Representatives where the The baneful effect of the defective
bill, being of local application, title here presented is not so difficult
originated. to perceive. Such title did not inform
the members of Congress as to the
Of course, the Constitution does not full impact of the law; it did not
require Congress to employ in the apprise the people in the towns of
title of an enactment, language of Buldon and Parang in Cotabato and
such precision as to mirror, fully index in the province of Cotabato itself that
or catalogue all the contents and the part of their territory is being taken
minute details therein. It suffices if the away from their towns and province
title should serve the purpose of the and added to the adjacent Province
constitutional demand that it inform of Lanao del Sur; it kept the public in
the legislators, the persons interested the dark as to what towns and
in the subject of the bill, and the provinces were actually affected by
public, of the nature, scope and the bill. These are the pressures
consequences of the proposed law which heavily weigh against the
and its operation. And this, to lead constitutionality of Republic Act 4790.
them to inquire into the body of the
bill, study and discuss the same, take 2. Preamble
appropriate action thereon, and, thus,
prevent surprise or fraud upon the The part of a statute explaining the
legislators. reason for its enactment and the
objects sought to be accomplished.
The test of the sufficiency of a title is
whether or not it is misleading; and, In the case of People v. Echaves,38
which technical accuracy is not the Court dismissed the case against
essential, and the subject need not the accused because Republic Act
be stated in express terms where it is No. 5440 punishes squatting in urban
clearly inferable from the details set communities and not applicable to
forth, a title which is so uncertain that agricultural lands. The law does not
the average person reading it would apply to pasture lands because its
not be informed of the purpose of the preamble shows that it was intended
enactment or put on inquiry as to its to apply to squatting in urban
contents, or which is misleading, communities or more particularly to
either in referring to or indicating one illegal constructions in squatter areas
subject where another or different made by well-to-do individuals.
one is really embraced in the act, or
in omitting any expression or Also in the case of People v.
indication of the real subject or scope Purisima,39 the Court also dismissed
of the act, is bad. the case that was filed against the
accused because the preamble of
In determining sufficiency of P.D. No. 9 expressly states that the
particular title its substance rather carrying of the bladed weapon should
than its form should be considered, be aimed at creating subversion,
and the purpose of the constitutional rebellion, insurrection, lawless
requirement, of giving notice to all violence, criminality, chaos, aid
38 G.R. No. L-47757-61, January 28, 1980 39 G.R. No. L-42050-66, November 20, 1978
(Colossians 3:23)
public disorder before the said That part of the statute which
accused be penalized. announces the prior statutes or
specifies provisions which have been
3. Enacting Clause abrogated by reason of the
enactment of the new law.
That part of the statute which
declares its enactment and serves to 6. Saving
identify it as an act of legislation
proceeding from the proper A restriction in a repealing act, which
legislative authority. is intended to save rights, pending
proceedings, penalties, etc., from the
4. Body annihilation which would result from
unrestricted repeal.
The main and operative part of the
statute containing its substantive and 7. Separability
even procedural provisions. Provisos
and exceptions may also be found in That part of the statute which
the body of the statute. provides that in the event that one or
more provisions are declared void or
In the case of Aboitiz v. City of unconstitutional, the remaining
Cebu,40 the Court invalidated provisions shall still be in force.
Ordinance No. 207 which was
enacted by the City of Cebu because 8. Date of Effectivity
the power to tax is an attribute of
sovereignty and for it to be exercised That part of the statute which
by a municipal corporation requires a announces the effective date of the
clear delegation of the power by law.
means of charter grant or by a
general enabling statute. 9. When is the publication to be made
and when the publication to be
Legislative intent must be made?
ascertained from a consideration of
the statute as a whole and not of an Laws shall take effect after 15 days
isolated part or a particular provision following the completion of their
alone. This is a cardinal rule of publication either in the Official
statutory construction. For taken in Gazette, or in a newspaper of general
the abstract, a word or phrase might circulation in the Philippines, unless it
easily convey a meaning quite is otherwise provided.41
different from the one actually
intended and evident when the word Also, it was held in the landmark case
or phrase is considered with those of Tanada v. Tuvera,42 that the
with which it is associated. Thus an publication of laws are so significant
apparently general provision may because without publication, the
have a limited application if viewed people have no means of knowing
together with other provisions. what presidential decrees have
actually been promulgated, much
5. Repealing less a definite way of informing
40 G.R. No. L-14526, March 31, 1965 42 G.R. No. L-63915, April 24, 1985
41 Art. 2 of the New Civil Code
(Colossians 3:23)
themselves of the specific contents dominant force loses its continuity when it
and texts of such decrees. approaches the realm of "ordinances levying
or imposing taxes, fees or other charges" in
3. Ordinances particular. There, the Local Tax Code
controls. Here, as always, a general
What is the essential requisite of a valid provision must give way to a particular
ordinance? provision.
It was held in the case of Primicias v. 4. Presidential Decrees

Municipality of Urdaneta,43 that an essential
requisite for a valid ordinance is, among Will a special law, like a Presidential
others, that is "must not contravene . . . the Decree, prevail over a general law, like the
statute," for it is a "fundamental principle that National Internal Revenue Code?
municipal ordinances are inferior in status
and subordinate to the laws of the state." The court held in the case of Commissioner
Following this general rule, whenever there v. Philippine Airlines,45 that between
is a conflict between an ordinance and a Presidential Decree No. 1520, on one hand,
statute, the ordinance "must give way. which is a special law specifically governing
the franchise of PAL, issued on 11 June
Can a prior special law be repealed by a 1978; and the NIRC of 1997, on the other,
subsequent general law? which is a general law on national internal
revenue taxes, that took effect on 1 January
No. the rule commonly said is that a prior 1998, the former prevails. The rule is that on
special law is not ordinarily repealed by a a specific matter, the special law shall prevail
subsequent general law. The fact that one is over the general law, which shall be resorted
special and the other general creates a to only to supply deficiencies in the former.
presumption that the special is to be In addition, where there are two statutes, the
considered as remaining an exception of the earlier special and the later general the terms
general, one as a general law of the land, the of the general broad enough to include the
other as the law of a particular case. matter provided for in the special the fact that
one is special and the other is general
Exception to the general rule: creates a presumption that the special is to
be considered as remaining an exception to
However, it was held in the case of Bagatsing the general, one as a general law of the land,
v. Ramirez,44 that the rule readily yields to a the other as the law of a particular case. It is
situation where the special statute refers to a a canon of statutory construction that a later
subject in general, which the general statute statute, general in its terms and not expressly
treats in particular. The exactly is the repealing a prior special statute, will
circumstance obtaining in the case at bar. ordinarily not affect the special provisions of
Section 17 of the Revised Charter of the City such earlier statute.
of Manila speaks of "ordinance" in general,
i.e., irrespective of the nature and scope
thereof, whereas, Section 43 of the Local Tax
Code relates to "ordinances levying or
imposing taxes, fees or other charges" in
particular. In regard, therefore, to ordinances
in general, the Revised Charter of the City of
Manila is doubtless dominant, but, that
43 G.R. No. L-26702, October 18, 1979 45 G.R. No. 180066, July 7, 2009
44 G.R. No. L-41631, December 17, 1976
(Colossians 3:23)
INTERPRETATION OF STATUTES Criminal statutes are to be strictly

construed. No person should be brought
1. Penal Statutes within their terms who is not clearly within
them, nor should any act be pronounced
General Rule: criminal which is not clearly made so by
the statute. (U. S. vs. Madrigal, 27 Phil.
A maxim in statutory construction Rep., 347.)
mandates that penal statutes should be
strictly construed against the state and In the case of US v. Abad Santos,47 the
liberally in favor of the accused. The Court held that it will not hold one person
phrase, truly, may not be a mere clich criminally responsible for the acts of
but, so also, it is not meant to wrongly another, committed without his
shield an accused from criminal liability. 46 knowledge or consent, unless there is a
statute requiring it so plain in its terms
A penal law cannot make an act that there is no doubt of the intention of
punishable in a manner in which it was the Legislature.
not punishable when committed
(Prospective application of criminal law). If the penal statute is clear and
unambiguous, it should not be strictly
Exception to the General Rule: construed against the State
Whenever a new statute dealing with The Court held in the case of People v.
crime establishes conditions more lenient Gachalian,48 that the final claim of
or favorable to the accused, it can be appellee is that inasmuch as the
given a retroactive effect. provisions of the law (Minimum Wage
Law) under which he was prosecuted are
Exception to the exception: ambiguous and there is doubt as to their
interpretation, that doubt should be
Where the offender is a habitual criminal resolved in his favor because a penal
or when the new law is expressly made statute should be strictly construed
inapplicable to pending actions or against the State. This contention must
existing causes of action. also fail if we are to be consistent with our
interpretation of the provisions of Section
Who is considered as a habitual 15 (a) of the law. We have stated that that
criminal/delinquent? section is clear and unambiguous and
covers the provisions embodied in
A person shall be deemed to be a Section 3 of the law, and if such is the
habitual delinquent if within a period of 10 case then there is no room for the
years from the date of his release or last application of the principle invoked by
conviction of the crimes of serious or less appellee.
serious physical injuries, robbery, theft,
estafa, or falsification, he is found guilty Violation of BP 22 constitutes malum
of any said crimes a third time or oftener. prohibitum
In case of doubt, how should a penal The Court held in the case of Meriz v.
law be construed? People49 that the gravamen of the
offense under BP 22 is the act of making
46 Meriz v. People, G.R. No. 134498, November 48 G.R. Nos. L-12011-14, September 30, 1958
13, 2001 49 G.R. No. 134498, November 13, 2001
47 G.R. No. L-12262, February 10, 1917
(Colossians 3:23)
or issuing a worthless check or a check

that is dishonored upon presentment for How to interpret the exempting
payment. The act effectively declares the provision of Tax Statutes?
offense to be one of malum prohibitum.
The only valid query then is whether the The rule is that the exempting provision
law has been breached, i.e., by the mere is to be construed liberally in favor of the
act of issuing a bad check, without so taxing authority and strictly against
much regard as to the criminal intent of exemption from tax liability, the result
the issuer. being that statutory provisions for the
refund of taxes are strictly construed in
The element of knowledge involves a favor of the State and against the
state of mind that obviously would be taxpayer (82 C.J.S. pp. 957-958;
difficult to establish; hence, the statute Helvering vs. Northwest Steel Rolling
itself creates a prima facie presumption Mills, 311 US 46 85 L. ed. 29 S. Ct., 51
of knowledge on the insufficiency of Am. Jur. p. 526).
funds or credit coincidental with the
attendance of the two other elements. In the case of La Carlota v. Jimenez,50
the Court held that Central is not entitled
The essential elements of the offense to a tax refund because it is clear that
penalized under BP 22 are (1) the imported fertilizers are exempt from the
making, drawing and issuance of any payment of the 17% tax only if the same
check to apply to account or for value; (2) were imported by planters or farmers
the knowledge of the maker, drawer or directly or through their cooperatives.
issuer that at the time of issue he does Since Central "is not the planter
not have sufficient funds in or credit with ultimately benefited by the fertilizers,
the drawee bank for the payment of such much less a cooperative within the
check in full upon its presentment; and purview of Rep. Act No. 601, as
(3) subsequent dishonor of the check by amended", the only possible conclusion
the drawee bank for insufficiency of funds is that the imported fertilizers in question
or credit or dishonor for the same reason are not entitled to the exemption provided
had not the drawer, without any valid by law.
cause, ordered the bank to stop
payment. How to interpret tax statutes in case of
doubt?
The prima facie presumption that the
drawer has knowledge of the It is the general rule in the interpretation
insufficiency of funds or credit at the time of statutes levying taxes or duties not to
of the issuance, or on the presentment for extend their provisions beyond the clear
payment, of the check might be rebutted import of the language used. In every
by payment of the value of the check case of doubt, such statutes are
either by the drawer or by the drawee construed most strongly against the
bank within five banking days from notice Government and in favor of the citizen,
of the dishonor given to the drawer. The because burdens are not to be imposed,
payment could thus be a complete nor presumed to be imposed, beyond
defense that would lie regardless of the what the statutes expressly and clearly
strength of the evidence offered by the import. (U. S. vs. Wigglesworth [1842], 2
prosecution. Story, 369; Froehlich & Kuttner vs.
Collector of Customs [1911], 18 Phil.,
2. Tax Statutes 461.)
50 G.R. No. L-12436, May 31, 1961
(Colossians 3:23)
indispensable requirement of law, the

Hence, it was held in the case of Manila non-fulfillment of which initiates the sale.
Railroad Company v. Insular Collector of
Customs,51 that the trial judge was 3. Labor Statutes
correct in classifying dust shields
(manufactured of wool and hair mixed) It should be noted that Article 4 of the
under paragraph 197 of section 8 of the Labor Code of the Philippines, as
Tariff Law of 1909, and in refusing to amended, provides that "All doubts in the
classify them under paragraph 141 of the implementation and interpretation of this
same section of the law, a provision Code, including its implementing rules
imposing a higher rate of tax. In and regulations shall be resolved in favor
classifying the same, the Court took into of labor."
account the purpose of the article and
then acknowledging that it is in reality In the case of Villavert v. ECC,53 the
used as a detached part or railways Court ruled in favor of the mother of the
vehicles. The second point is that late Marcelino with regard to her claim to
paragraph 141 is a general provision the death benefit of the latter. It was
while paragraph 197 is a special found out that there is no evidence at all
provision. Where there is in the same that Marcelino had a "bout of alcoholic
statute a particular enactment and also a intoxication" (a sign of pancreatitis)
general one which is embraced in the shortly before he died. Neither is there a
former, the particular enactment must be showing that he used drugs. Hence, the
operative, and the general enactment Court ordered GSIS to pay for the death
must be taken to effect only such cases benefit of Marcelino.
within its general language as are not
within the provisions of the particular However, there is no room for
enactment. interpretation in case the provision of the
Labor Code is clear.
Notice of sale to the delinquent land
owners and to the public in general is In the case of Del Rosario v. NLRC,54 the
an essential and indispensable Court upheld the ruling of the NLRC
requirement holding the petitioner and the Security
agency jointly and severally liable with
It was held in the case of Serfino v. CA,52 regard to the under-payment of wages
that the assailed decision of the appellate that was alleged by the employees-
court declares that the prescribed security guards.
procedure in auction sales of property for
tax delinquency being in derogation of The Court ruled that when petitioner
property rights should be followed entered into a Contract of Services with
punctiliously. Strict adherence to the the Security Agency and the latter hired
statutes governing tax sales is imperative complainants to work as guards for the
not only for the protection of the tax former, petitioner became an indirect
payers, but also to allay any possible employer of respondents-complainants
suspicion of collusion between the buyer pursuant to the unequivocal terms of
and the public officials called upon to Articles 106 and 107 of the Labor Code,
enforce such laws. Notice of sale to the as amended:
delinquent land owners and to the public
in general is an essential and Art. 106. Contractor or subcontractor .—
51 G.R. No. L-30264, March 12, 1929 53 G.R. No. L-48605 December 14, 1981
52 G.R. No. L-40858, September 15, 1987 54 G.R. No. L-64204, May 31, 1985
(Colossians 3:23)
the officers of Philsa Construction and

In the event that the contractor or Trading Co., Inc.
subcontractor fails to pay the wages of
his employees in accordance with this With regard to the Workmen’s
Code, the employer shag be jointly and Compensation Act, the presumption of
severally liable with his contractor or compensability subsists in favor of the
subcontractor to such employees to the claimant.
extent of the work performed under the
contract, in the same manner and extent The Court held in the case of Manahan v.
that he is liable to employees directly ECC,56 that in case of doubt, the same
employed by him. should be resolved in favor of the worker,
and that social legislations – like the
Art. 107. Indirect employer. —The Workmen's Compensation Act and the
provisions of the immediately preceding Labor Code – should be liberally
Article shall likewise apply to any person, construed to attain their laudable
partnership, association or corporation objective, i.e., to give relief to the
which, not being an employer, contracts workman and/or his dependents in the
with an independent contractor for the event that the former should die or
performance of any work, task, job or sustain an injury.
project.
Hence, the Court in this case properly
But if the claim for differentials and ordered GSIS to pay compensation
benefits is directed to the foreign benefits to Maria with regard to the death
employer, the valid and legal claims compensation benefit of her husband
arising from such violation will be applied Nazario who died due to “Enteric Fever.”
to the cash and surety bond of the PH
Recruiter filed with the Philippine 4. Naturalization Laws
Overseas Employment Administration
(POEA) pursuant to POEA’s rules and "Naturalization laws should be rigidly
regulations which states: enforced and strictly construed in favor of
the government and against the
The bonds shall answer for all valid and applicant"
legal claims arising from violations of the
conditions for the grant and use of the In the case of Co v. Republic,57 the Court
license or authority and contracts of denied the naturalization of the petitioner
employment. The bonds shall likewise on the ground that he did not file his
guarantee compliance with the income tax return. The Court held that
provisions of the Labor Code and its our law also requires that petitioner must
implementing rules and regulations have conducted himself in a proper and
relating to recruitment and placement, irreproachable manner during the entire
the rules of the Administration and period of his residence in the Philippines
relevant issuances of the Ministry and all in his relation with the constituted
liabilities which the Administration may government as well as with the
impose. community in which he is living.
Apparently, failure to file his income tax
Hence, it was proper for the Court in the return explicitly manifested that he has
case of Del Rosario v. NLRC,55 to dismiss not conducted himself properly in his
the writ of execution that was filed against relation with our government. Hence, the
55 G.R. No. 85416, July 24, 1990 57 G.R. No. L-12150, May 26, 1960
56 G.R. No. L-44899, April 22, 1981
(Colossians 3:23)
petition for naturalization was not line with the public policy behind
granted. probation, the right of appeal should not
be irrevocably lost from the moment a
But in the case of Pe v. Republic,58 the convicted accused files an application for
Court granted the naturalization petition probation. Appeal and probation spring
of the brothers-petitioners even though from the same policy considerations of
there is only one character reference who justice, humanity, and compassion.
testified in the proceedings because the
other witness, Panfilo Chua, could not In the case of Yusi v. Morales,60 the Court
testify because he died shortly before held that the “waiver rule” under the
said hearing. The Court stated that it was Probation Law is unwarranted because it
a valid excuse. is in the best interests of justice that the
court should take the necessary steps to
However, in the case of Velasco v. insure that the accused has been fully
Republic,59 the Court ruled the apprised of the full import of his
naturalization of the petitioner when he application before the court acts on it.
had a convenient arrangement with his Apparently, the Court found out that the
family in order to show a token fact that the petitioners’ counsel of record
compliance with the requirement of the was not present when the petitioners
law that to become a Filipino citizen one applied for probation with regard to their
must have a lucrative income or estafa case.
occupation. Apparently, the Court found
out that the Wilson Drug Store is partly Also, in the case of Colinares v. People,61
owned by his mother who has one-fifth the Court upheld the accused petition for
capital investment therein. probation. The Court held that it is true
that under the probation law the accused
5. Probation Laws who appeals from the judgment of
conviction is disqualified from availing
Application for probation is an admission himself of the benefits of probation. But,
of guilt on the part of an accused for the as it happens, two judgments of
crime which led to the judgment of conviction have been meted out to Arnel:
conviction and that the application for one, a conviction for frustrated homicide
probation is considered a waiver upon his by the regional trial court, now set aside;
part to file an appeal, it is in the best and, two, a conviction for attempted
interests of justice that the court should homicide by the Supreme Court.
take the necessary steps to insure that
the accused has been fully apprised of The Probation Law, said the Court in
the full import of his application before the Francisco, requires that an accused must
court acts on it. not have appealed his conviction before
he can avail himself of probation. This
The underlying philosophy of probation is requirement outlaws the element of
indeed one of liberality towards the speculation on the part of the accusedto
accused. It is not served by a harsh and wager on the result of his appealthat
stringent interpretation of the statutory when his conviction is finally affirmed on
provisions. Probation is a major step appeal, the moment of truth well-nigh at
taken by our Government towards the hand, and the service of his sentence
deterrence and minimizing of crime and inevitable, he now applies for probation
the humanization of criminal justice. In as an escape hatch thus rendering
58 G.R. Nos. L-7872-73, July 20, 1956 60 G.R. No. L-61958, April 28, 1983
59 G.R. No. L-14214, May 25, 1960 61 G.R. No. 182748, December 13, 2011
(Colossians 3:23)
nugatory the appellate courts affirmance In the case of Bello v. CA,63 the Court
of his conviction. held that in the construction of Rules of
Court, the Court is all the more so bound
Besides, in appealing his case, Arnel to liberally construe them to avoid
raised the issue of correctness of the injustice, discrimination and unfairness
penalty imposed on him. He claimed that and to supply the void — that is certainly
the evidence at best warranted his within the spirit and purpose of the Rule
conviction only for attempted, not to eliminate repugnancy and
frustrated, homicide, which crime called inconsistency — by holding as it does
for a probationable penalty. In a way, now that courts of first instance are
therefore, Arnel sought from the equally bound as the higher courts not to
beginning to bring down the penalty to dismiss misdirected appeals timely made
the level where the law would allow him but to certify them to the proper appellate
to apply for probation. court. Hence, the Court reversed the
decision of the Court of Appeals and
As Justice Vicente V. Mendoza said in his ordered the petitioner to appeal the
dissent in Francisco, the Probation Law judgment to the CA. In this case, the
must not be regarded as a mere privilege Court liberally construed the Rules of
to be given to the accused only where it Court since they were confronted with the
clearly appears he comes within its letter; thorny question (which has confused
to do so would be to disregard the many a practitioner), whether or not
teaching in many cases that the municipal and city court’s judgment
Probation Law should be applied in favor should be taken directly to the Court of
of the accused not because it is a criminal Appeals or Courts of First Instance.
law but to achieve its beneficent purpose.
7. Expropriation Law
6. Rules of Court
The exercise of the right of eminent
Section 2, Rule 1 of the Rules of Court domain, whether directly by the State, or
provides for the basic rule of thumb that by its authorized agents, is necessarily in
said "rules shall be liberally construed in derogation of private rights, and the rule
order to promote its objective and to in that case is that the authority must be
assist the parties in obtaining just, strictly construed. No species of property
speedy, and inexpensive determination is held by individuals with greater
of every action and proceeding." tenacity, and none is guarded by the
constitution and laws more sedulously,
The Court held in the case of Imperial than the right to the freehold of
Insurance Inc. v. Rosete,62 that the inhabitants. When the legislature
respondent judge was unnecessarily interferes with that right, and, for greater
harsh when the Rules call for liberality in public purposes, appropriates the land of
such cases when he declared the an individual without his consent, the
petitioner in default even though the plain meaning of the law should not be
counsel for the private respondent enlarged by doubtly interpretation.
manifested to the respondent judge his
willingness to give the petitioner an In the case of The City of Manila v.
opportunity to comply with the Chinese Community of Manila,64 the
requirement of the court. Court strictly interpreted the
expropriation action made by the City of
62 G.R. No. L-55630, March 6, 1990 64 G.R. No. L-14355, October 31, 1919
63 G.R. No. L-38161, March 29, 1974
(Colossians 3:23)
Manila because there is no proof that

there is really a necessity to expropriate
and open the portion of the cemetery in
order to create an extension of Rizal
Avenue, Manila.
(Colossians 3:23)
LATIN RULES ambiguity, it must be given its literal

meaning and applied without attempted
1. Verba Legis interpretation. This plain-meaning rule or
verba legis derived from the maxim index
This plain-meaning rule or verba legis animi sermo est (speech is the index of
derived from the maxim, index animi intention) rests on the valid presumption
sermo est (speech is the index of that the words employed by, the
intention) rests on the valid presumption legislature in a statute correctly express
that the words employed by the its intent or will and preclude the court
legislature in a statute correctly express from construing it differently.
its intent or will and preclude the court
from construing it differently. The The legislature is presumed to know the
legislature is presumed to know the meaning of the words, to: have used
meaning of the words, to have used words advisedly, and to have expressed
words advisedly, and to have expressed its intent by the use of such words as are
its intent by the use of such words as are found in the statute. Verba legis non est
found in the statute. Verba legis non est recedendum, or from the words of a
recedendum, or from the words of a statute there should be no departure.
statute there should be no departure.65 Neither does the provision admit of any
qualification. If in the wisdom of the
A cardinal rule in statutory construction is Court, there may be a ground or grounds
that when the law is clear and free from for non-application of the above-cited
any doubt or ambiguity, there is no room provision, this should be by way of
for construction or interpretation. There exception, such as when the
is only room for application. As the reinstatement may be inadmissible due
statute is clear, plain, and free from to ensuing strained relations between the
ambiguity, it must be given its literal employer and the employee.
meaning and applied without attempted
interpretation. This is what is known as Also, it was held in the case of Victoria v.
the plain-meaning rule or verba legis. It COMELEC,68 the Court held that the law
is expressed in the maxim, index animi is clear that the ranking in the
sermo, or “speech is the index of Sanggunian shall be determined on the
intention.” Furthermore, there is the basis of the proportion of the votes
maxim verba legis non est recedendum, obtained by each winning candidate of
or “from the words of a statute there the total number of registered voters who
should be no departure.”66 actually voted. In such a case, the Court
has no recourse but to merely apply the
In the case of Globe-Makay Cable and law. The courts may not speculate as to
Radio Corporation v. NLRC,67 the Court the probable intent of the legislature
held that the wording of the Labor Code apart from the words.
is clear and unambiguous: "An employee
who is unjustly dismissed from work shall Lastly, in the case of Garcia v.
be entitled to reinstatement. . . . and to COMELEC,69 the Court held that the
his full backwages. . . ." Under the literal interpretation of Sec. 251 of the
principles of statutory construction, if a Omnibus Election Code is that only the
statute is clears plain and free from winning candidates have the
65 Victoria vs Comelec, G.R. No. 109005, January 67 G.R. No. 82511, March 3, 1992
10, 1994 68 G.R. No. 109005, January 10, 1994
66 Bolos vs Bolos, G.R. No. 186400, October 20, 69 G.R. No. 216691, July 21, 2015
2010
(Colossians 3:23)
demandable right to be furnished a copy spirit of the law is the law itself, resort
of the Certificate of Canvass of Votes and should be to the rule that the spirit of the
Proclamation (COCP). Second, it law controls its letter.70
amplifies the general rule that the
prescriptive period ought to be reckoned In the case of Paras v. COMELEC,71 the
from the actual date of proclamation, not Court held that the evident intent of
from notice through service of a COCP, Section 74 is to subject an elective local
since the losing candidates are not even official to recall election once during his
required to be served a copy of the term of office. Paragraph (b) construed
COCP in the first place. Lastly, it warns together with paragraph (a) merely
the candidates to be more vigilant in designates the period when such elective
monitoring the results of the elections for local official may be subject of a recall
them to be conscious of the deadline for election, that is, during the second year
filing an election protest, should they opt of his term of office. Thus, subscribing to
to contest the results. Hence, the Court petitioner's interpretation of the phrase
reversed the COMELEC En Banc regular local election to include the SK
decision in favor of Payumo and declared election will unduly circumscribe the
that the latter filed out of period with novel provision of the Local Government
regard to his election protest. Code on recall, a mode of removal of
public officers by initiation of the people
2. Ratio Legis Est Anima Legis before the end of his term.
The spirit rather than the letter of the law. 3. Mens Legislatoris
A statute must be read according to its
spirit or intent, for what is within the spirit Legislative intent or intent of the
is within the statute although it is not legislature or mens legislatoris is a
within its letter, and that which is within controlling factor in the construction and
the letter but not within the spirit is not interpretation of a law. The letter of the
within the statute. Put a bit differently, law gives way to the true intent of the
that which is within the intent of the legislature. And when a statute is
lawmaker is as much within the statute as susceptible of more than one
if within the letter; and that which is within construction, the Courts shall adopt the
the letter of the statute is not within the construction which will most tend to give
statute unless within the intent of the effect to the intent of the legislature.
lawmakers. Withal, courts ought not to
interpret and should not accept an In the case of Matabuena v. Cervantes,72
interpretation that would defeat the intent the Court invalidated the donation that
of the law and its legislators. was made by the respondent’s deceased
husband because the ban on donation
The legislative intent is not at all times between spouses, as enunciated in Art.
accurately reflected in the manner in 133 of the Civil Code, also applies to a
which the resulting law is couched. Thus, common law relationship. Apparently, the
applying a verba legis or strictly literal said donation was made in 1956 before
interpretation of a statute may render it they were married in 1962.
meaningless and lead to inconvenience,
an absurd situation or injustice. To The policy of the law which embodies a
obviate this aberration, and bearing in deeply-rooted notion of what is just and
mind the principle that the intent or the what is right would be nullified if such
70League of Cities of the Philippines vs Comelec, 71 G.R. No. 123169, November 4, 1996
G.R. No. 176951, December 21, 2009 72 G.R. No. L-28771, March 31, 1971
(Colossians 3:23)
irregular relationship instead of being The law may be harsh but that is the law.
visited with disabilities would be attended
with benefits. Certainly a legal norm In the case of People v. Macarandang,74
should not be susceptible to such a the Court held that the appointment of the
reproach. If there is ever any occasion accused as secret agent to the assist in
where the principle of statutory the maintenance of peace and order
construction that what is within the spirit campaigns and detention of crimes,
of the law is as much a part of it as what sufficiently put him within the category of
is written, this is it. Otherwise the basic a "peace officer" equivalent even to a
purpose discernible in such codal member of the municipal police expressly
provision would not be attained. covered by section 879 of the Revised
Whatever omission may be apparent in Administrative Code.
an interpretation purely literal of the
language used must be remedied by an However, the case of People v.
adherence to its avowed objective. In the Macarandang was later on reversed in
language of Justice Pablo: "El espiritu the case of People v. Mapa,75 wherein
que informa la ley debe ser la luz que ha the Court ruled that the law cannot be any
de guiar a los tribunales en la aplicación clearer. No provision is made for a secret
de sus disposiciones.” agent. As such he is not exempt. Our task
is equally clear. The first and
In the case of Prasnik v. Republic,73 the fundamental duty of courts is to apply the
Court held that the law evidently intends law. "Construction and interpretation
to allow adoption whether the child be come only after it has been demonstrated
recognized or not. If the intention were to that application is impossible or
allow adoption only to unrecognized inadequate without them."
children, as contended, then the
provision of Article 338 would be of no But in the case of People v. Escudero,76
useful purpose because such children the Court ruled that the appellant was
could have been validly adopted even issued a firearm in the performance of his
without it. And we say so because a official duties and for his personal
natural child not recognized has no right protection. It also appears that appellant
whatever and being considered legally a was informed by Col. Maristela that it was
total stranger to his parents, he may be not necessary for him to apply for a
adopted under Article 337. The same license or to register the said firearm
cannot be said with regard to an because it was government property and
acknowledged natural child because, his therefore could not legally be registered
filiation having already been established, or licensed in appellant's name. Capt.
his adoption cannot be made under the Adolfo M. Bringas from whom appellant
general principles governing adoption (2 received the firearm also informed the
Manresa 5th ed., 80). There is therefore latter that no permit to carry the pistol was
need of an express provision allowing the necessary "because you are already
adoption of an acknowledged natural appointed as CIS agent."
child as an exception to the rule and that
is what is contemplated in the article we It should be noted that at the time the
are considering. accused committed the crime (1962), the
prevailing jurisprudence is People v.
4. Dura Lex Sed Lex
73 G.R. No. L-8639, March 23, 1956 75 G.R. No. L-22301, August 30, 1967
74 G.R. No. L-12088, December 23, 1959 76 G.R. No. L-22291, November 15, 1976
(Colossians 3:23)
Macarandang.77 The case of People v. provided in sections 199, 200, and 201
Mapa was only promulgated in 1967, who must and who may bring such
which is subsequent to the date of actions; and it is very clear that it was his
commission of the crime. intention to give such right to those
expressly mentioned in the above-cited
5. Expresio Unius sections and to no other, following the
well-known rule of law "inclusio unius est
This statutory construction principle exclusio alterius." It has been noticed that
states that: where a statute, by its terms, the above referred to three sections only
is expressly limited to certain matters, it mention the Attorney-General, the
may not, by interpretation or provincial fiscal, and the individual
construction, be extended to others. The claiming to be entitled to the office
rule proceeds from the premise that the unlawfully held and exercised by another.
legislature would not have made It is to be inferred from this last provision
specified enumerations in a statute had that the individual who does not claim to
the intention been not to restrict its have such a right cannot bring an action
meaning and to confine its terms to those for usurpation of public office.
expressly mentioned.78
Also, in the case of Green Star Express
Exceptions: Inc. v. Nissin-Universal Robina
Corporation,83 the Court held that under
1) When adherence to such will lead to the new Rules, service of summons upon
incongruities and in a violation of the an agent of the corporation is no longer
equal protection clause of the authorized. The rule now likewise states
Constitution79 "general manager" instead of "manager";
"corporate secretary" instead of merely
2) When enumeration not intended to be "secretary"; and "treasurer" instead of
exclusive80 "cashier." It has now become restricted,
limited, and exclusive only to the persons
3) No reason exists why a person or enumerated in the aforementioned
thing is excluded81 provision, following the rule in statutory
construction that the express mention of
In the case of Acosta v. Flor,82 the Court one person excludes all others, or
held that if the legislator had intended to expressio unios est exclusio alterius.
give to all citizens alike the right to Service must, therefore, be made only on
maintain an action for usurpation of the persons expressly listed in the rules.
public office, he would have plainly said If the revision committee intended to
so in order to avoid doubt on a subject of liberalize the rule on service of summons,
such far-reaching importance. A simple it could have easily done so by clear and
provision would have sufficed for this concise language.
purpose. Far from it, the legislator has on
the contrary especially and specifically
77 G.R. No. L-12088, December 23, 1959 80 Manabat vs. de Aquino, G.R. No. L-5558, April
78 Martin Centeno vs. Victoria Villalon-Pornillos, 29, 1953; Escribano vs. Avila; G.R. No. L-30375,
G.R. No. 113092, September 1, 1994; Lerum vs. September 12, 1978
Cruz, G.R. No. L-2783, November 29, 1950 81 People vs. Manantan, G.R. No. L-14129, July
79 Chua vs. Civil Service Commission, G.R. No. 31, 1962; Primero vs. Court of Appeals, G.R. No.
88979, February 7, 1992 48468-69, November 22, 1989
82 G.R. No. 2122, September 13, 1905
83 G.R. No. 181517, July 06, 2015
(Colossians 3:23)
Lastly, in the case of PAGCOR v. BIR,84 applicable only to things of the same kind
the Court held that the legislative intent, or class as those specifically referred to.
as shown by the discussions in the
Bicameral Conference Meeting, is to It is quite apparent that what was
require PAGCOR to pay corporate contemplated in the Act was the
income tax; hence, the omission or distribution of gadgets of the kind
removal of PAGCOR from exemption referred to as a means of inducement to
from the payment of corporate income obtain a favorable vote for the candidate
tax. It is a basic precept of statutory responsible for its distribution.
construction that the express mention of
one person, thing, act, or consequence However, in the case of US v. Sto. Nino,87
excludes all others as expressed in the the Court ruled that an iron bar with an
familiar maxim expressio unius est iron ball falls within the purview of "other
exclusio alterius. Thus, the express deadly weapon" as stated under Act No.
mention of the GOCCs exempted from 1780. In the said case the Court clarified
payment of corporate income tax that the proviso to the Act clearly
excludes all others. Not being excepted, indicates that in the view of the legislature
petitioner PAGCOR must be regarded as the carrying of an unlicensed revolver
coming within the purview of the general would be a violation of the Act. By the
rule that GOCCs shall pay corporate proviso it manifested its intention to
income tax. include in the prohibition weapons other
than the armas blancas (knives)
6. Ejusdem Generis therein specified.
Under the well-known principle of But in the case of Parayno v.

ejusdem generis, the general words Jovellanos,88 the Court ruled that the
following any enumeration being maxim ejusdem generis is not applicable
applicable only to things of the same kind in the present case. Instead, what
or class as those specifically referred applied in this case was the legal maxim
to.85 expressio unius est exclusio alterius
which means that the express mention of
In the case of Mutuc v. COMELEC,86 the one thing implies the exclusion of others.
Court held that the use of tape jingle for
campaign purposes is not included Hence, because of the distinct and
among those propaganda gadgets (i.e. definite meanings alluded to the two
being made of pens, lighters, fans, terms by the zoning ordinance,
flashlights, athletic goods or materials, respondents could not insist that
wallets, bandanas, shirts, hats, matches, "gasoline service station" under Section
and cigarettes, and concluding with the 44 necessarily included "gasoline filling
words "and the like.") that are prohibited station" under Section 21. Indeed, the
to be disseminated pursuant to the activities undertaken in a "gas service
Constitutional Convention Act. station" did not automatically embrace
those in a "gas filling station."
What was done cannot merit our
approval under the well-known principle Hence, the Court directed the
of ejusdem generis, the general words Municipality of Calasiao to cease and
following any enumeration being desist from enforcing Resolution No. 50
84G.R. No. 172087, March 15, 2011 86 G.R. No. L-32717, November 26, 1970
85 Mutuc v. COMELEC, G.R. No. L-32717, 87 G.R. No. L-5000, March 11, 1909
November 26, 1970 88 G.R. No. 148408, July 14, 2006
(Colossians 3:23)
against petitioner insofar as it seeks to administrative remedy provided by law

close down or transfer her gasoline should first be exhausted.
station to another location.
8. Noscitur a Sociis
7. Casus Omisus Pro Omisso Habendus
Est Under the doctrine of noscitur a sociis,
the meaning of questionable words or
Under the said rule, a person, object or phrases in a statute may be ascertained
thing omitted from an enumeration must by reference to the meaning of words or
be held to have been omitted phrases associated with it.
intentionally.89
In the case of Sanciangco v. Rono,92
90
In the case of People v. Manantan, the Justice Teehankee dissents and says
Court ruled that the maxim "casus that the basic position of barangay
omisus" can operate and apply only if captain and ABC president held by him
and when the omission has been clearly are essentially elective. He cannot fall
established. In the case under under Section 13(l) of the Act which
consideration, it has already been shown refers to purely appointive officials,
that the legislature did not exclude or omit including active officers and members of
justices of the peace from the the Armed Forces of the Philippines and
enumeration of officers precluded from officials and employees of government-
engaging in partisan political activities. owned and controlled corporations,
Rather, they were merely called by under the statutory construction rule of
another term. In the new law, or Section noscitur a sociis.
54 of the Revised Election Code, justices
of the peace were just called "judges." Also, in the case of Aisporna v. CA,93 the
Court held that considering that the
But in the case of Rufino Lopez & Sons definition of an insurance agent as found
Inc. v. CTA,91 the Court ruled that it is in the second paragraph (Sec. 189 of the
more reasonable and logical to hold that Insurance law) is also applicable to the
in Section 11 of the Act, the Legislature agent mentioned in the first paragraph, to
meant and intended to say, the receive a compensation by the agent is
Commissioner of Customs, instead of an essential element for a violation of the
Collector of Customs in the first first paragraph of the aforesaid section.
paragraph and the first part of the second The appellate court has established
paragraph of said section. By doing so, ultimately that the petitioner-accused did
Sec. 7 and Sec. 11 of R.A. No. 1125 will not receive any compensation for the
be in harmony. issuance of the insurance policy of
Eugenio Isidro. Nevertheless, the
However, the Court still dismissed the accused was convicted by the appellate
petition on the ground that the decision of court for, according to the latter, the
Collector of Customs should be further receipt of compensation for issuing an
elevated to the Commissioner of insurance policy is not an essential
Customs before applying for a judicial element for a violation of the first
relief based on the sound rule that before paragraph of Section 189 of the
one resorts to the Courts, the Insurance Act.
89 People v. Manantan, G.R. No. 14129, July 31, 91 G.R. No. L-9274, February 1, 1957
1962 92 G.R. No. L-68709, July 19, 1985
90 G.R. No. 14129, July 31, 1962 93 G.R. No. L-39419, April 12, 1982
(Colossians 3:23)
In the said case, the Court applied the

doctrine of associated words (Noscitur a
Sociis) which provides that where a
particular word or phrase in a statement
is ambiguous in itself or is equally
susceptible of various meanings, its true
meaning may be made clear and specific
by considering the company in which it is
found or with which it is associated.
(Colossians 3:23)
CONSTRUCTION AND INTERPRETATION

OF WORDS AND PHRASES It is well settled that the word "may" is
merely permissive and operates to confer
a. Ordinary Meaning discretion upon a party. Under ordinary
circumstances, the term "may be"
It is a basic rule of statutory construction connotes possibility; it does not connote
that if a statute is clear, plain and free certainty. "May" is an auxillary verb
from ambiguity, it must be given its literal indicating liberty, opportunity, permission
meaning and applied without any or possibility.96
interpretation. Not only that; in the matter
of interpretation of laws on probation, the In the case of Capati v. Ocampo,97 the
Court has pronounced that "the policy of Court ruled that stipulation as to venue in
liberality of probation statutes cannot the contract in question is simply
prevail against the categorical provisions permissive. By the said stipulation, the
of the law."94 parties did not agree to file their suits
solely and exclusively with the Court of
In the case of Pablo v. Castillo,95 the First Instance of Naga. They merely
Court denied the application for probation agreed to submit their disputes to the
of the petitioner on the ground that said court, without waiving their right to
Section 9 paragraph (c) of the Probation seek recourse in the court specifically
Law is in clear and plain language, to the indicated in Section 2 (b), Rule 4 of the
effect that a person who was previously Rules of Court.
convicted by final judgment of an offense
punishable by imprisonment of not less Since the complaint has been filed (for
than one month and one day and/or a fine failure to finish on time the restoration of
of not less than two hundred pesos, is Feati Building) in the Court of First
disqualified from applying for probation. Instance of Pampanga, where the
This provision of law is definitive and plaintiff resides, the venue of action is
unqualified. There is nothing in Section 9, properly laid in accordance with Section
paragraph (c) which qualifies "previous 2 (b), Rule 4 of the Rules of Court.
conviction" as referring to a conviction for
a crime which is entirely different from In the case of Basania v. Luna,98 the
that for which the offender is applying for Court held that both the purpose and
probation or a crime which arose out of a language of Section 47 as amended by
single act or transaction as petitioner Republic Act No. 4:388 indicate that the
would have the court to understand. enumeration of permanent and
prominent objects that may be used as tie
Since a prior conviction was entered points is exclusive. According to the
against the petitioner, penalizing her with explanatory note of 11. No. 2522 (which
a fine of P4,648.00, the said conviction became R.A. No. 4388), its purpose in
automatically placed her within the ambit amending Section 47 by making it
of those disqualified from probation mandatory for the locator to indicate the
under Section 9 paragraph (c) of P.D. tie points of his claim is to eliminate claim
968. jumpers and Minimize overlapping of
claims." (Cong. Rec., H.R., May 13,
b. May and Shall 1963, pp. 1345-1346). In order to achieve
94 Pablo v. Castillo, G.R. No. 125108, August 3, 96 Capati v. De Ocampo, G.R. No. L-28742, April
2000 30, 1982
95 G.R. No. 125108, August 3, 2000 97 G.R. No. L-28742, April 30, 1982
98 G.R. No. L-34135-36, February 24, 1981
(Colossians 3:23)
this Purpose it was deemed necessary to her course in Nursing in college and was
specify what permanent and prominent graduated and given a diploma under this
objects may be used as tie points: hence name; and she exercised the right of
the enumeration in the second paragraph suffrage likewise under this name. There
of Section 47 is significant that this is therefore ample justification to grant
paragraph did not originally exist: it was fully her petition which is not whimsical
introduced By No. 4388. If the intention but on the contrary is based on a solid
were not to make its enumeration and reasonable ground, i.e. to avoid
exclusive, there would have been no confusion.
necessity for adding it to Section 47.
Besides, the last sentence of Section 4 d. Previous
as amended also by the states that the
declaration of location that has no In the case of Rura v. Leopena,100 the
bearing and distance to a tie point us Court determined whether or not Rura
herein described shall be null and void." was entitled to probation because the
The phrase as herein described" judge contended that the reckoning point
obviously, refers to the descriptions of the “previous” conviction should be
contained in the second paragraph: based on the dates of the commission of
therefore if the tie point does not the five (5) estafa cases filed against him,
correspond to any such descriptions. it which were committed on different dates.
would not Be a valid tie point under However, the Supreme Court ruled in
Section 47 as amended.. favor of Rura explaining that he applied
for probation he had no previous
c. Principally and Exclusively conviction by final judgment. When he
applied for probation the only conviction
In the case of Alfon v. Republic,99 the against him was the judgment which was
Court ruled that the only reason why the the subject of his application. The statute
lower court denied the petitioner's prayer relates "previous" to the date of
to change her surname is that as conviction, not to the date of the
legitimate child of Filomeno Duterte and commission of the crime. Hence, Rura is
Estrella Alfon she should principally use qualified to apply for probation pursuant
the surname of her father invoking Art. to Probation Law (P.D. No. 968, as
364 of the Civil Code. But the word amended), more specifically Section 9
"principally" as used in the codal thereof.
provision is not equivalent to
"exclusively" so that there is no legal e. Every
obstacle if a legitimate or legitimated
child should choose to use the surname It was held in the case of National
of its mother to which it is equally entitled. Housing Corporation v. Juco,101 the Court
upheld that the Civil Service embraces
Since it was satisfactorily shown that every branch, agency, subdivision, and
petitioner has, since childhood, borne the instrumentality of the Government,
name Estrella S. Alfon although her birth including every government-owned or
records and baptismal certificate show controlled corporation."
otherwise; she was enrolled in the
schools from the grades up to college "Every" means each one of a group,
under the name Estrella S. Alfon; all her without exception. It means all possible
friends call her by this name; she finished and all taken one by one. Of course, our
99 G.R. No. L-51201, May 29, 1980 101 G.R. No. L-64313, January 17, 1985
100 G.R. Nos. L-69810-14 June 19, 1985
(Colossians 3:23)
decision in this case refers to a

corporation created as a government- There is after all no clearly demonstrable
owned or controlled entity. It does not and convincing reason why the law would
cover cases involving private firms taken allow municipal imposition of taxes on
over by the government in foreclosure or gasoline and yet withhold such power if
similar proceedings. the imposition is in the form of a sales tax,
when it was a known fact at the time of
Hence, the decision of the National Labor the enactment of the Local Autonomy Act
Relations Commission in remanding the in 1959 — and this still is true to this day
illegal dismissal case filed by Roco, a — that gasoline is of no profitable use to
project engineer of NHC and was the companies which own it unless
charged of theft and/or malversation, to turned over to the consuming public
the labor arbiter was set aside. which, perforce, must pay for the right to
obtain that commodity.
f. Punctuations
Therefore, the refund to Arabay should
It was held in the case of Arabay Inc. v. be granted.
CFI,102 the Court held that under the
provisions of Section 2 of R.A. 2264, two g. Surplusage
courses of action in the exercise of their
taxing powers are denied to In the case of Demafiles v. COMELEC,103
municipalities and municipal districts, to the Court still took cognizance of the case
wit: despite of the contention of Galido that
the case is moot and academic since he
a. To levy any sales tax in whatever had took his oath and assumed office as
form; and a mayor on November 22, pursuant to
Republic Act 4870.
b. To levy any tax on articles subject
to specific tax under the National Obviously the frame of reference is
Internal Revenue Code. section 2 of the statute which reads:
The relevant proviso of Section 2 of the The first mayor, vice-mayor and
Local Autonomy Act states: councilors of the Municipality of
Sebaste shall be elected in the next
... Provided, That municipalities and general elections for local officials
municipal districts shall, in no case, and shall have qualified [sic].
impose any percentage tax on sales
or other taxes on articles subject to Apparently, the last portion of the
specific tax, except gasoline, under provision — "and shall have qualified" —
the provisions of the National Internal is devoid of any meaning, is unmitigated
Revenue Code…. jargon in or out of context, and does not
warrant the respondent's reading that the
Therefore, the Congress deliberately and term of office of the first municipal
intentionally meant to put it within the officials of Sebaste begins immediately
power of such local governments to after their proclamation.
impose whatever type or form of taxes
the latter may deem proper to levy on The Court held that by the general rule
gasoline including a sales tax or one in that the term of office of municipal
that form. officials shall begin on the first day of
102 G.R. No. L-37684, September 10, 1975 103 G.R. No. L-28396, December 29, 1967
(Colossians 3:23)
January following their election, and so section 4 of Commonwealth Act No. 144,
the assumption of office by the provides:
respondent Galido in no way affected the
basic issues in this case, which we need SEC. 1686. Additional counsel to
not reach and resolve. assist fiscal. — The Secretary of
Justice may appoint any lawyer,
Also, in the case of Capiz v. Ramirez,104 being either a subordinate from his
the contended provision states that the office or a competent person not in
title of the Act reads: "an Act to amend the public service, temporarily to
and compile the laws relating to lands of assist a fiscal or prosecuting attorney
the public domain, and for other in the discharge of his duties, and
purposes." with the same authority therein as
might be exercised by the Attorney
The contention of the respondent that it General or Solicitor General.
includes privately owned agricultural
lands. Hence, the respondent does not The phraseology of section 17 of Act No.
want to honor the right in rem of the 867 before cited also affords an
petitioner on the ground that the penalty illustration of the idea that the authority to
provided in section 122 of the “Public assist is separate and apart from the
Land Act” includes not only a nullity of the general powers of the Attorney General.
contract but also a reversion of the
property and its improvements to the In the language of this section, the
Government. person appointed was
Apparently, the Court held that the 1. to assist the fiscal in the discharge of
phrase "and for other purposes" his duties and
expresses no specific purpose and
imports indefinitely something different 2. to represent the Attorney General in
from that which precedes it in the title. It such matters.
is, therefore, universally rejected as
having no force or effect wherever this If the two phrases meant the same thing,
constitutional restriction operates. then one of them would be superfluous.
There is no apparent reason for holding
Having demonstrated that said Act No. that one or the other was a surplusage.
2874 does not apply to lands of the
respondent, hence, the action in rem of However, in the case of Lo Cham v.
the petitioner should be granted. Ocampo,106 the Court ruled that the act of
Dr. Lantin in signing and filing information
Furthermore, in the case of Lo Cham v. and conducting preliminary
Ocampo,105 the Court held that the investigations are valid pursuant to the
clause "with the same authority therein assignment made by Acting Secretary of
as might be exercised by the Attorney Justice Ramon Quisumbing.
General or Solicitor General" does not
exclude the latter authority. The reason is that the power to sign
informations, make investigations and
Section 1686 of the Revised conduct prosecutions is inherent in the
Administrative Code, as amended by power "to assist" a prosecuting attorney,
104 G.R. No. L-16197, March 12, 1920 106 G.R. No. L-831, November 21, 1946
105 G.R. No. L-831, November 21, 1946
(Colossians 3:23)
as these words are used in the

Administrative Code.
The powers of the Solicitor General

bestowed on the appointee to assist the
fiscal must be held as cumulative or an
addition to the authority to sign
informations, which is inherent in his
appointment. In other words, the clause
"with the same authority therein as might
be exercised by the Attorney General or
Solicitor General" does not exclude the
latter authority.
The phraseology of section 17 of Act No.

867 before cited also affords an
illustration of the idea that the authority to
assist is separate and apart from the
general powers of the Attorney General.
In the language of this section, the
person appointed was (1) to assist the
fiscal in the discharge of his duties and
(2) to represent the Attorney General in
such matters. If the two phrases meant
the same thing, then one of them would
be superfluous. There is no apparent
reason for holding that one or the other
was a surplusage.
(Colossians 3:23)
RULES ON CONFLICTING PROVISIONS Almeda against respondent appellee Julian

OF THE SAME STATUTES Florentino, who was appointed as as
secretary of the Municipal Board, was
In the case of Manila Railroad Company v. dismissed.
Insular Collector of Customs,107 the Court
reconciled the conflicting provisions of Sec. 8
of the Tariff Law of 1909. The second point is
that paragraph 141 is a general provision
while paragraph 197 is a special provision.
These paragraphs placed in parallel columns

for purposes of comparison read:
141. Manufactures of wool not otherwise

provided for, forty per centum ad valorem
197. Vehicles for use on railways and

tramways, and detached parts thereof, ten
per centum ad valorem.
Where there is in the same statute a

particular enactment and also a general one
which is embraced in the former, the
particular enactment must be operative, and
the general enactment must be taken to
effect only such cases within its general
language as are not within the provisions of
the particular enactment.
Hence the Court affirmed the trial judge’s

decision in classifying dust shields under
paragraph 197 of section 8 of the Tariff Law
of 1909, and in refusing to classify them
under paragraph 141 of the same section of
the law.
In the case of Almeda v. Florentino,108 the

Court held that the provisions of RA 183 and
RA 2709 (amending Sec. 12 of RA 183)
should be interpreted in limiting the power of
the Vice-Mayor under section 12 (as
amended) to the appointment of all the
employees of the Board other than the
Secretary, who is to be appointed by the
Board itself, as specifically prescribed by
section 14 of the Pasay city charter.
Hence, the Quo Warranto proceedings

instituted by petitioner appellant Policarpo
107 G.R. No. L-30264, March 12, 1929 108 G.R. No. L-23800, December 21, 1965
(Colossians 3:23)
RULES ON CONFLICTING PROVISIONS prevail over both Commonwealth Acts Nos.

OF DIFFERENT STATUTES 548 and 146.
RA 409 vis-à-vis Articles 700 & 702 of the Also, there is no provision, specific or
Civil Code otherwise, which can be found in this statute
(Commonwealth Act No. 146) vesting power
In the case of Sitchon v. Aquino,109 the Court in the Public Service Commission to
held that articles 700 and 702 of Republic Act superintend, regulate, or control the streets
No. 386, should yield to said section 31 of of respondent City or suspend its power to
Republic Act No. 409, not only because the license or prohibit the occupancy thereof. On
former preceded the latter, but, also, the other hand, this right or authority, as
because said section 31 of Republic Act No. hereinabove concluded, is conferred upon
409 is a special provision specifically respondent City of Manila. The power vested
designed for the City of Manila, whereas said in the Public Service Commission under
Articles 700 and 702 of the Civil Code are Section 16 (m) is, therefore, subordinate to
general provisions applicable throughout the the authority granted to respondent City,
Philippines. under said section 18 (hh).
Again, houses constructed, without Powers conferred by law upon the Public
governmental authority, on public streets and Service Commission were not designed to
waterways, obstruct at all times the free use deny or supersede the regulatory power of
by the public of said streets and waterways, local governments over motor traffic, in the
and, accordingly, constitute nuisances per streets subject to their control, is made
se, aside from public nuisances. As such, the evident by section 17 (j) of the Public Service
summary removal thereof, without judicial Act (Commonwealth Act No. 146) which
process or proceedings may be authorized provides:
by the statute or municipal ordinance,
despite the due process clause. “To require any public service to comply with
the laws of the Philippines, and with any
Hence, the Court upheld the duty of the city provincial resolution or municipal ordinance
engineer to authorize the removal of a public relating thereto, and to conform to the duties
nuisance after due notice without the need of imposed upon it thereby, or by the provisions
a district health officer as contemplated in of its own charter, whether obtained under
Articles 700 and 702 of the Civil Code. any general or special law of the Philippines.”
RA No. 409 vis-à-vis Commonwealth Act No. Also, it is not disputed that petitioner has not
548 and the Public Service Law been totally banned or prohibited from
operating all his buses, he having allowed to
Also in the case of Lagman v. City of operate two (2) "shuttle" buses within the city
Manila,110 the Court held that Republic Act limits.
No. 409, as amended, otherwise known as
the Revised Charter of the City of Manila, is Republic Act No. 409 vis-à-vis Article 2189 of
a special law and of later enactment than the Civil Code
Commonwealth Act No. 548 and the Public
Service Law (Commonwealth Act No. 146, The Court ruled in the case of City of Manila
as amended), so that even if conflict exists v. Teotico111 that insofar as its territorial
between the provisions of the former act and application is concerned, Republic Act No.
the latter acts, Republic Act No. 409 should 409 is a special law and the Civil Code a
109 G.R. No. L-8191, February 27, 1956 111 G.R. No. L-23052, January 29, 1968
110 G.R. No. L-23305, June 30, 1966
(Colossians 3:23)
general legislation; but, as regards the The rule is that on a specific matter, the
subject-matter of the provisions above special law shall prevail over the general law,
quoted, Section 4 of Republic Act 409 which shall be resorted to only to supply
establishes a general rule regulating the deficiencies in the former.
liability of the City of Manila for: "damages or
injury to persons or property arising from the In addition, where there are two statutes, the
failure of" city officers "to enforce the earlier special and the later general the terms
provisions of" said Act "or any other law or of the general broad enough to include the
ordinance, or from negligence" of the city matter provided for in the special the fact that
"Mayor, Municipal Board, or other officers one is special and the other is general
while enforcing or attempting to enforce said creates a presumption that the special is to
provisions." be considered as remaining an exception to
the general, one as a general law of the land,
On the other hand, Article 2189 of the Civil the other as the law of a particular case. It is
Code constitutes a particular prescription a canon of statutory construction that a later
making "provinces, cities and municipalities . statute, general in its terms and not expressly
. . liable for damages for the death of, or repealing a prior special statute, will
injury suffered by any person by reason" — ordinarily not affect the special provisions of
specifically — "of the defective condition of such earlier statute.
roads, streets, bridges, public buildings, and
other-public works under their control or Section 13 of Presidential Decree No. 1520
supervision." permits PAL to pay whichever is lower of the
basic corporate income tax or the franchise
In other words, said section 4 refers to tax – (2%) of the gross revenues; and the tax
liability arising from negligence, in general, so paid shall be in lieu of all other taxes,
regardless of the object thereof, whereas except only real property tax. Hence, under
Article 2189 governs liability due to its franchise, PAL is to pay the least amount
"defective streets," in particular. Since the of tax possible.
present action is based upon the alleged
defective condition of a road, said Article
2189 is decisive thereon.
Hence, the provision of the Civil Code shall

prevail.
PD 1590 vis-à-vis National Internal Revenue

Code
But in the case of Philippine Air Lines v.

CIR,112 the Court ruled that between
Presidential Decree No. 1520, on one hand,
which is a special law specifically governing
the franchise of PAL, issued on 11 June
1978; and the NIRC of 1997, on the other,
which is a general law on national internal
revenue taxes, that took effect on 1 January
1998, the former prevails.
112 G.R. No. 180066, July 7, 2009
(Colossians 3:23)
RULE ON CONFLICT BETWEEN A other law or ordinance, or from negligence of

SPECIAL PROVISION OF A GENERAL the City Mayor, Municipal Board, or other
LAW AND A GENERAL PROVISION OF A officers while enforcing or attempting to
SPECIAL LAW enforce the provisions of the charter or of any
other law or ordinance.
Revised Charter of Manila vis-à-vis Local
Tax Code Upon the other hand, Article 2189 of the Civil
Code makes cities liable for damages for the
Present controversy in the case of Bagatsing death of, or injury suffered by any persons by
v. Ramirez113 is the apparent conflict reason of the defective condition of roads,
between the Revised Charter of the City of streets, bridges, public buildings, and other
Manila and the Local Tax Code on the public works under their control or
manner of publishing a tax ordinance supervision.
enacted by the Municipal Board of Manila.
On review, the Court held the Civil Code
The lower Court declared the said tax controlling. It is true that, insofar as its
ordinance as unconstitutional on the ground territorial application is concerned, the
that the same was not published at all in two Revised City Charter is a special law and the
daily newspapers of general circulation in the subject matter of the two laws, the Revised
City of Manila before its enactment. Neither City Charter establishes a general rule of
was it published in the same manner after liability arising from negligence in general,
approval, although it was posted in the regardless of the object thereof, whereas the
legislative hall and in all city public markets Civil Code constitutes a particular
and city public libraries. prescription for liability due to defective
streets in particular.
In this case, the Court held that a chartered
city is not an independent sovereignty. The
state remains supreme in all matters not
purely local. Otherwise stated, a charter must
yield to the constitution and general laws of
the state, it is to have read into it that general
law which governs the municipal corporation
and which the corporation cannot set aside
but to which it must yield. When a city adopts
a charter, it in effect adopts as part of its
charter general law of such character.
However, the case of City of Manila v.

Teotico114 is opposite. In that case, Teotico
sued the City of Manila for damages arising
from the injuries he suffered when he fell
inside an uncovered and unlighted
catchbasin or manhole on P. Burgos Avenue.
The City of Manila denied liability on the
basis of the City Charter (R.A. 409)
exempting the City of Manila from any liability
for damages or injury to persons or property
arising from the failure of the city officers to
enforce the provisions of the charter or any
113 G.R. No. L-41631, December 17, 1976 114 G.R. No. L-23052, January 29, 1968
(Colossians 3:23)
WHAT ARE EXTERNAL AIDS AND WHEN the precise scope of the rule thus
ARE THEY RESORTED TO adopted. All are agreed that in the
absence of the above cited provisions of
a. Origin of Statutes section 36 of General Orders No. 58,
which provides that an order discharging
The only question raised in US v. one of two or more accused persons that
Veneancio De Guzman115 is the accused he may be a witness for the prosecution
right to exemption from prosecution for "shall amount to an acquittal of the
the crime thus committed, on the ground defendant thus discharged and shall be a
that a former information, charging the bar to further prosecution for the same
same offense, had been dismissed as to offense," a corrupt and fraudulent
him in order that he might testify as a agreement, or an agreement not faithfully
witness for the prosecution with by the accused would be no bar to
further prosecution.
The Court held that for the proper
construction and application of the terms b. Legislative Debates
and provisions of legislative enactment's
which have been borrowed from or of Violation of RA 1405
times essential to review the legislative
history of such enactments and to find an In the case of China Banking Corporation
authoritative guide for their interpretation v. Ortega,116 the Court decided whether
and application in the decision of or not a banking institution may validly
American and English courts of last refuse to comply with a court process
resort construing and applying similar garnishing the bank deposit of a
legislation in those countries. judgment debtor, by invoking the
provisions of Republic Act No. 1405.
Experience, under English and American
procedural methods, has shown that The petitioners argue that the disclosure
without the aid of informers testifying of the information required by the court
against their coparticipants in crime, does not fall within any of the four (4)
many guilty parties would escape, where exceptions enumerated in Section 2
the facts which would sustain a (except upon written permission of the
conviction are known only to the guilty depositor, or in cases of impeachment, or
persons themselves. upon order of a competent court in cases
of bribery or dereliction of duty of public
However, from a review of the history and officials, or in cases where the money
development of the practice under deposited or invested is the subject
consideration, and reasoning along the matter of the litigation), and that if the
line of the above cited, we are all agreed questioned orders are complied with Tan
that the failure of the accused in the case Kim Liong may be criminally liable under
at bar, faithfully and honestly to carry out Section 5 and the bank exposed to a
his undertaking to appear as a witness possible damage suit by B & B Forest
and to tell the truth at the trial of his Development Corporation.
coaccused, deprived him of the right to
plead his former dismissal as a bar to his However, the Court denied such
prosecution in the case now before us. contention. It merely required Tan Kim
Liong to inform the court whether or not
The Court found considerable difficulty the defendant B & B Forest Development
however in coming to an agreement as to Corporation had a deposit in the China
115 G.R. No. L-9144, March 27, 1915 116 G.R. No. L-34964, January 31, 1973
(Colossians 3:23)
Banking Corporation only for purposes of discharging the duties thereof and was
the garnishment issued by it, so that the merely acting as Mayor during the
bank would hold the same intact and not temporary disability of the regular
allow any withdrawal until further order. It incumbent.
will be noted from the discussion of the
conference committee report on Senate Sec. 27 of the Election Code provides:
Bill No. 351 and House Bill No. 3977,
which later became Republic Act 1405, SEC. 27. Candidate holding office. —
that it was not the intention of the Any elective provincial, municipal, or city
lawmakers to place bank deposits official running for an office, other than
beyond the reach of execution to satisfy the one which he is actually holding, shall
a final judgment. be considered resigned from his office
from the moment of the filing of his
It is sufficiently clear from the foregoing certificate of candidacy.
discussion of the conference committee
report of the two houses of Congress that In view of the possible uncertainty and
the prohibition against examination of or doubt as to whether or not a Vice-Mayor
inquiry into a bank deposit under by acting as Mayor can be regarded as
Republic Act 1405 does not preclude its actually holding said office of Mayor, the
being garnished to insure satisfaction of Court have to go back and resort to the
a judgment. Indeed there is no real legislative proceedings had, particularly
inquiry in such a case, and if the the discussions and interpellations in
existence of the deposit is disclosed the both houses of Congress leading to the
disclosure is purely incidental to the enactment of section 27 of the Revised
execution process. It is hard to conceive Election Code, with a view to
that it was ever within the intention of ascertaining the intention of that body.
Congress to enable debtors to evade After all, in interpreting a law, the primary
payment of their just debts, even if consideration is the ascertainment of the
ordered by the Court, through the intent and the purpose of the legislature
expedient of converting their assets into promulgating the same.
cash and depositing the same in a bank.
The Court held that the purpose of the
Violation of Sec. 27 of the Election Code Legislature in enacting section 27 of the
Revised Election Code was to allow an
In the case of Salaysay v. Castro117 official to continue occupying an elective
Petitioner contends that his case does provincial, municipal or city office to
not come under section 27 of the Election which he had been appointed or elected,
Code for the reason that when he filed his while campaigning for his election as
certificate of candidacy for the office of long as he runs for the same office.
Mayor, he was actually holding said
office. In conclusion, we believe and hold that a
Vice-Mayor acting as Mayor does not
The Respondents, however, maintain “actually hold the office” of Mayor within
that the office Petitioner was actually the meaning of section 27 of Republic Act
holding when he filed his certificate of No. 180; that a Vice-Mayor who files his
candidacy for the office of Mayor was that certificate of candidacy for the office of
of Vice-Mayor, the one to which he had Mayor, even while acting as Mayor, is
been duly elected; he was not actually considered resigned from the office of
holding the office of Mayor but merely Vice-Mayor for the reason that is the only
117 G.R. No. L-9669, January 31, 1956
(Colossians 3:23)
office that he “actually holds” within the a social security system which shall be
contemplation of section 27 of the suitable to the needs of the people
Revised Election Code and the office he throughout the Philippines and shall
is running for (Mayor) is naturally other provide protection to employees against
than the one he is actually holding (Vice- the hazards of disability, sickness, old
Mayor); and that having ceased to be a age and death." (See. 2, Republic Act
Vice- Mayor, he automatically lost all No. 1161, as amended.) Such enactment
right to act as Mayor. is a legitimate exercise of the police
power. It affords protection to labor,
Republic Act No. 1161, as amended, especially to working women and minors,
otherwise known as the Social Security and is in full accord with the constitutional
Law of 1954 provisions on the "promotion of social
justice to insure the well-being and
The issue in the case of Roman Catholic economic security of all the people."
Archbishop of Manila v. Social Security Being in fact a social legislation,
Commission118 is whether or not the compatible with the policy of the Church
Roman Catholic Archbishop of Manila is to ameliorate living conditions of the
exempted from compulsory coverage of working class, appellant cannot arbitrarily
Republic Act No. 1161, as amended, delimit the extent of its provisions to
otherwise known as the Social Security relations between capital and labor in
Law of 1954. industry and agriculture.
The request of the petitioner was based Violation of BP 22

on the claim that the said Act is a labor
law and does not cover religious and The issue in the case of De Villa v. Court
charitable institutions but is limited to of Appeals119 is whether or not the
businesses and activities organized for Regional Trial Court of Makati has
profit. jurisdiction over the case in question.
Also, the said Petitioner also contended
However, the Court ruled that it is that no offense was committed since the
significant to note that when Republic Act check involved was payable in dollars,
No. 1161 was enacted, services hence, the obligation created is null and
performed in the employ of institutions void pursuant to Republic Act No. 529
organized for religious or charitable (An Act to Assure Uniform Value of
purposes were by express provisions of Philippine Coin and Currency).
said Act excluded from coverage thereof
(sec. 8, par. [j] subpars. 7 and 8). That In this case the Petitioner contended that
portion of the law, however, has been no offense was committed since the
deleted by express provision of Republic check involved was payable in dollars,
Act No. 1792, which took effect in 1957. hence, the obligation created is null and
This is clear indication that the void pursuant to Republic Act No. 529
Legislature intended to include charitable (An Act to Assure Uniform Value of
and religious institutions within the scope Philippine Coin and Currency).
of the law.
The Court ruled that the information
Furthermore, the Social Security Law under consideration specifically alleged
was enacted pursuant to the "policy of that the offense was committed in Makati,
the Republic of the Philippines to Metro Manila and therefore, the same is
develop, establish gradually and perfect controlling and sufficient to vest
118 G.R. No. L-15045, January 20, 1961 119 G.R. No. 87416, April 8, 1991
(Colossians 3:23)
jurisdiction upon the Regional Trial Court

of Makati. The Court acquires jurisdiction
over the case and over the person of the
accused upon the filing of a complaint or
information in court which initiates a
criminal action.
Also, under the Bouncing Checks Law

(B.P. Blg. 22), foreign checks, provided
they are either drawn and issued in the
Philippines though payable outside
thereof . . . are within the coverage of said
law.
It is a cardinal principle in statutory

construction that where the law does not
distinguish courts should not distinguish.
Parenthetically, the rule is that where the
law does not make any exception, courts
may not except something unless
compelling reasons exist to justify it.
Thus, where there is doubts as to what a
provision of a statute means, the
meaning put to the provision during the
legislative deliberation or discussion on
the bill may be adopted.
The records of the Batasan, Vol. III,

unmistakably show that the intention of
the lawmakers is to apply the law to
whatever currency may be the subject
thereof.
Hence, the Court dismissed the petition.
(Colossians 3:23)

Statutory Construction END Law Notes PDF

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Statutory Construction END Law Notes PDF

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Statutory Construction Reviewer

By: Ernesto N. Dayao, Jr., CPA END Law Notes

sustained while in line of duty. A

2. Dangerous Drugs Act

In order to effectively fulfill the intent

Subjects of Constructions: as already pointed out, while the 1935

Article VIII is dedicated to the Judicial Indeed, it is axiomatic in statutory

enactment must necessarily shed Applies only to a specific person or

Definition of “Statute” 2. Prohibitory Law

3. Local Law A statute that defines criminal

Affects the public at large. 3. Curative

2. Private Law A form of retrospective legislation

transactions in order to correct errors 1. Title

As a general rule, can a law be applied In the case of City of Baguio v.

It was held in the case of Primicias v. 4. Presidential Decrees

INTERPRETATION OF STATUTES Criminal statutes are to be strictly

or issuing a worthless check or a check

50 G.R. No. L-12436, May 31, 1961

indispensable requirement of law, the

the officers of Philsa Construction and

Manila because there is no proof that

LATIN RULES ambiguity, it must be given its literal

Under the well-known principle of But in the case of Parayno v.

against petitioner insofar as it seeks to administrative remedy provided by law

In the said case, the Court applied the

CONSTRUCTION AND INTERPRETATION

decision in this case refers to a

as these words are used in the

The powers of the Solicitor General

The phraseology of section 17 of Act No.

RULES ON CONFLICTING PROVISIONS Almeda against respondent appellee Julian

These paragraphs placed in parallel columns

141. Manufactures of wool not otherwise

197. Vehicles for use on railways and

Where there is in the same statute a

Hence the Court affirmed the trial judge’s

In the case of Almeda v. Florentino,108 the

Hence, the Quo Warranto proceedings

RULES ON CONFLICTING PROVISIONS prevail over both Commonwealth Acts Nos.

Hence, the provision of the Civil Code shall

PD 1590 vis-à-vis National Internal Revenue

But in the case of Philippine Air Lines v.

112 G.R. No. 180066, July 7, 2009

RULE ON CONFLICT BETWEEN A other law or ordinance, or from negligence of

However, the case of City of Manila v.

117 G.R. No. L-9669, January 31, 1956

The request of the petitioner was based Violation of BP 22

jurisdiction upon the Regional Trial Court

Also, under the Bouncing Checks Law

It is a cardinal principle in statutory

The records of the Batasan, Vol. III,

Hence, the Court dismissed the petition.

You might also like