Statutory Construction
Statutory Construction
Statutory Construction
STATUTORY CONSTRUCTION
1. DEFINITION:
Note: Only statutes with ambiguous or doubtful meaning may be the subject of statutory
construction.
AMBIGUITY
It has been held that ambiguity does not only arise from the meaning of the particular
words but also from the general scope and meaning of the statute when all the provisions are
examined. There is also ambiguity when a literal interpretation of the words would lead to
unreasonable, unjust, or absurd consequences, or where a statute is in conflict with the
constitution, or where the statute would defeat the policy of the legislation. (Tarlac Development
Corporation vs. C.A., L-41012, September 30, 1976)
The judiciary interprets how legislation should apply in a particular case as no legislation
unambiguously and specifically addresses all matters.
Words are imperfect symbols to communicate intent. They are ambiguous and change
in meaning over time.
Unforeseen situations are inevitable, and new technologies and cultures make
application of existing laws difficult.
Uncertainties may be added to the statute in the course of enactment, such as the
need for compromise or catering to special interest groups.
*The author/s of the law do not have the pre-science of the Delphic Oracle to look in the
future and predict what exactly is going to happen. The most that we can expect from
them is the use of their wisdom and experience in making a law and their honest,
reasonable and just intention in helping build and develop our society.
Therefore, the court must try to determine how a statute should be enforced. This requires
statutory construction. It is a tenet of statutory construction that the legislature is supreme
(assuming constitutionality) when creating law and that the court is merely an interpreter
of the law. In practice, by performing the construction the court can make sweeping changes in
the operation of the law.
LEGAL HERMENEUTICS
- It is the branch of science that establishes the principles and rules of interpretation
and construction of written laws.
- It is the branch of science /jurisprudence which establishes the principles and
rules of interpretation and construction of written laws.
- Otherwise put, legal hermeneutics is the systematic body of rules which are
recognized as applicable to the construction and interpretation of legal writings.
(Blacks Legal Dictionary, Centennial ed. Quoted in Diaz, Stat. Con. 3rd Ed.,
2007 at page 11-12)
EXEGESIS
- The application of the principles and rules established by legal hermeneutics.
Formula:
Chapter 1
STATUTE, LAWS, BILLS
Statute- is an act of the legislature as an organized body; it is the written will of the legislature,
Expressed according to the form necessary to constitute it a law of the state and rendered
authentic by certain prescribed forms and solemnities.
Sometimes, the term is more broadly defined to include administrative regulations or any
enactment from whatever source originating, to which the state gives force of law.
Law- a rule of conduct or order of sequence which any being will not, ought not or cannot
deviate.
Elements: rule of conduct or order of sequence, non-deviation, and, consequence
(sanction - certain kind of force, legitimacy of authority)
Bill- is a proposed law; draft of a law submitted to the consideration of the legislative body for
adoption
Kinds of Bills
1. Appropriation Bill
- the primary and specific purpose is to authorize the release of funds from the
public treasury.
2. Revenue Bill
- one that levies taxes and raises funds for the government.
3. Tariff Bill
- one that specifies the rates or duties to be impose on imported articles.
4. Bill Increasing Public Debt
- one that authorizes the government to borrow money, either by borrowing from
external sources or offering bonds for public subscriptions.
5. Bill of Local Application
- one which is local in character like the creation of new town, city or province.
6. Private Bill
- one that will not operate directly for the public good but calculated to serve
goodwill (e.g. bills granting honorary membership).
Research
First Reading- any member of either house may present a bill, signed by him and
reference to the proper committee; principal author may propose the inclusions; the bill is
read by its title number and name/s of author/s.
Referral to the Appropriate Committee- if disapproved, the bill dies a natural
death unless the House decides otherwise following the submission of the report.
Third Reading- only the title of the bill is read; voting takes place; majority is sufficient
to pass the bill
3. As to Performance
- Permanent
- Temporary
4. As to Scope
- General
- Special
5. Other Classification
- A statute could either be prospective or retroactive
- A statute could either be repealing act or an amendatory
- A statute could either be reference statute or a declaratory statute
FUNCTIONS OF LAW:
1. TITLE- gives a general statement of, and calls attention to the subject matter of an act so that
legislators and the public maybe appraised of the subject matter of the legislation, and be
put upon inquiry regarding thereto.
- That which expresses the subject matter of the law. It can help in the construction
(interpretation) of statutes but it is not controlling and not entitled to much weight.
2. PREAMBLE- is the part of the statute following the title and preceding the enacting clause,
which states the reasons for or the objective of the enactment. It cannot enlarge or confer powers,
or cure inherent defects in the statute.
Points to remember:
- A preamble does not create a right nor does it grant any right
- It is not a source of government power
- It is not an essential part of a statute
3. ENACTING CLAUSE- the part which indicates the authority which promulgated the
enactment. The enacting clause is not essential to the validity of the law but this clause
cloth the statue with certain dignity because the specific authority that promulgated the
law is therein stated.
4. BODY- it contains the subject matter of the statute. The body of the statue should
embrace only one subject matter as required by the Constitution.
6. INTERPRETATIVE CLAUSE- the part of the statute where the legislature defines its own
language and prescribes rules for its construction.
7. REPEALING CLAUSE- the part which announces the legislative intent to terminate, revoke
or repeal another statute/s.
8. SAVING CLAUSE- the part which restricts the repealing act and preserves existing powers,
rights pending proceeding from the effect of the repeal.
9. SEPARABILITY CLAUSE- it is a clause which states that for any reason, any section or
provisions of the statute is held to be unconstitutional or revoked, the other section or
provision of the law shall not be affected.
Points to remember:
- A separability clause creates a presumption that the legislature intended a separability
rather than complete nullity of the statute. This means that if one part of the statute is
void or unconstitutional, the other parts, which are valid may still stand. This is the
GENERAL rule.
- The general rule, however, is subject to the limitation that if the part of the statute are so
mutually dependent and connected thereby creating a belief that the legislature intended
them as a whole, the nullity or constitutionality of one part may violate the rest.
10. DATE OF EFFECTIVITY- specifies the date and time when the law takes effect.
1. EXECUTIVE
- vested in the president; administer laws, carrying them into practical operation and
enforcing their due observance
2. LEGISLATIVE
- power to make, alter or repeal laws
- vested in a bicameral Congress
3. JUDICIARY
- power to interpret and apply the laws
- vested in one Supreme Court and such lower courts as may be established by law
PRINCIPLES:
Check and Balance (maintain equilibrium)
-Lawmaking power of Congress subject to veto power of the president, which in turn
may be overridden (avoid hasty and improvident legislation, i.e. Hodgepodge and log-
rolling legislation)
-Congress may refuse to give concurrence to an amnesty granted or treaty entered into by
the president
-Judicial review
Separation of Powers- The purpose is to prevent the concentration of authority in one person
or group that might lead to an irreversible error or abuse in its exercise. (Absolute power
corrupts absolutely.)
Justice Laurel:
To secure action, to forestall over action, to prevent despotism (absolute power)
and to obtain efficiency
Constitution:
The three branches are entrusted with each of their powers are not permitted to
encroach upon the powers of confided to the others.
Non-delegation of Powers
- What has been delegated cannot be delegated.
- Delegated power constitutes not only a right but also a duty to be performed by the
delegate through the instrumentality of his own judgement.
The judiciary interprets how legislation should apply in a particular case as no legislation
unambiguously and specifically addresses all matters.
Words are imperfect symbols to communicate intent. They are ambiguous and change
in meaning over time.
Unforeseen situations are inevitable, and new technologies and cultures make
application of existing laws difficult.
Uncertainties may be added to the statute in the course of enactment, such as the
need for compromise or catering to special interest groups.
Therefore, the court must try to determine how a statute should be enforced. This requires
statutory construction. It is a tenet of statutory construction that the legislature is supreme
(assuming constitutionality) when creating law and that the court is merely an interpreter
of the law. In practice, by performing the construction the court can make sweeping changes in
the operation of the law.
Where legislation and case law are in conflict, there is a presumption that legislation takes
precedence insofar as there is any inconsistency. In the United Kingdom this principle is known
as Parliamentary Sovereignty. In Australia and in the United States, the courts have
consistently stated that the text of the statute is used first, and it is read as it is written, using the
ordinary meaning of the words of the statute.
"[I]n interpreting a statute a court should always turn to one cardinal canon before
all others. . . .[C]ourts must presume that a legislature says in a statute what it
means and means in a statute what it says there." Connecticut Nat'l Bank v. Germain,
112 S. Ct. 1146, 1149 (1992). Indeed, "when the words of a statute are unambiguous,
then, this first canon is also the last: 'judicial inquiry is complete.'"[1]
"A fundamental rule of statutory construction requires that every part of a statute be
presumed to have some effect, and not be treated as meaningless unless absolutely
necessary." Raven Coal Corp. v. Absher, 153 Va. 332, 149 S.E. 541 (1929).
"In assessing statutory language, unless words have acquired a peculiar meaning, by
virtue of statutory definition or judicial construction, they are to be construed in
accordance with their common usage." Muller v. BP Exploration (Alaska) Inc., 923
P.2d 783, 787-88 (Alaska 1996);
"The principal command of statutory construction is that the court should
determine and effectuate the intent of the legislature using the plain language of the
statute as the primary indicator of legislative intent." State v. Ogden, 118 N.M. 234,
242, 880 P.2d 845, 853 (1994) The words of a statute . . . should be given their
ordinary meaning, absent clear and express legislative intention to the contrary, as
long as the ordinary meaning does not render the statutes application absurd,
unreasonable, or unjust. State v. Rowell, 121 N.M. 111, 114, 908 P.2d 1379, 1382
(1995) When the meaning of a statute is unclear or ambiguous, we have recognized that it
is the high duty and responsibility of the judicial branch of government to facilitate
and promote the legislatures accomplishment of its purpose. State ex rel. Helman v.
Federal jurisdictions may presume that either federal or local government authority prevails in
the absence of a defined rule. In Canada, there are areas of law where provincial governments
and the federal government have concurrent jurisdiction. In these cases the federal law is held to
be paramount. However, in areas where the Canadian constitution is silent, the federal
government does not necessarily have superior jurisdiction. Rather, an area of law that is not
expressly mentioned in Canada's Constitution will have to be interpreted to fall under either the
federal residual jurisdiction found in s. 91 -- known as the Peace, Order and Good Government
clause -- or the provinces residual jurisdiction of "Property and Civil Rights" under s. 92(10) of
the 1867 Constitution Act. This contrasts with other federal jurisdictions, notably the United
States and Australia, where it is presumed that if legislation is not enacted pursuant to a specific
provision of the federal Constitution, the states will have authority over the relevant matter in
their respective jurisdictions.
A statute shall not be interpreted so as to be inconsistent with other statutes. Where there is
an inconsistency, the judiciary will attempt to provide a harmonious interpretation.
Legislative bodies themselves may try to influence or assist the courts in interpreting their laws
by placing into the legislation itself statements to that effect. These provisions have many
different names, but are typically noted as:
Findings;
Declarations, sometimes suffixed with of Policy or of Intent; or
These provisions of the bill simply give the legislature's goals and desired effects of the law, and
are considered non-substantive and non-enforceable in and of themselves.[2][3]
CHAPTER 1
INTERPRETATION AND CONSTRUCTION
Rule: In determining the intention of the legislature, courts should resort first to interpretation
(using intrinsic aids) before resorting to construction (using extrinsic aids).
ATTY. NESTOR MONDOK 8
Professor, Statutory Construction
COLLEGE OF LAW
UNIVERSITY OF THE CORDILLERAS
Nothing wrong if we use the two methods at the same time- since both of them
are resorted to for the same purpose- ascertain the intention of the authors of the law.
A) INTERPRETATION
B) CONSTRUCTION
These two processes, interpretation and construction, have the same object or purpose
and that is: ascertaining the intent of the legislature.
The cardinal rule in the interpretation of all laws is to ascertain, and give effect to the
intent of the law (Agpalo, page 107)
The purpose of all rules or maxim is to discover the true intention of the law. They are
only valuable when they sub-serve this purpose. (City of Baguio vs. Marcos, GR No.
26100, February 28, 1969, 27 SCRA 342; 82 CJS page 526)
In determining the intention of the legislature, courts should resort first to intrinsic aid
before resorting to extrinsic aid.
- is the art of finding the true sense and meaning of word/s without going beyond the
context of the statute.
The process of discovering the true meaning of the language used. It is limited to
exploring the written text.
*The court resorts to interpretation when it seeks to ascertain the meaning of a word
found in a statute because such word, when considered with other words used in the statute
may reveal a meaning different from that which seemed apparent when such word is
considered abstractly, when given its usual meaning, or apart from the rest of the text.
(viewed in isolation)
It is the art of finding the true sense and meaning of word/s without going beyond the
context of the statute. It utilizes intrinsic aids (those found in the law itself) e.g. manner in
which the words were written or arranged, punctuations etc. .
- Interpretation utilizes intrinsic aids (those present in the law itself), which are as
follows:
e. Headings and Marginal Notes- determines the scope of the provisions and their
relation to other portions of the act, however, if the meaning of the statute or if its
text is clear, it will prevail as against the heading, if the latter has been prepared
by compilers and not the legislature.
A) TITLE: That part of the statute which gives a general statement of, and calls attention to,
the subject matter of an act, so that the legislators and the public may be appraised of the
subject matter of the legislation, and be put upon inquiry in regard thereto.
It expresses the subject matter of the law
It can help in the construction of statutes but it is not controlling and not entitled to much
Weight
B) PREAMBLE: it is that part of the statute following the tile preceding the enacting clause
which states the reason for, or the object of the statute.
Preamble- that part of the statute following the title and preceding the enacting clause
which state the reason or objectives of the enactment . It cannot enlarge or confer
powers, or cure inherent defects in the statutes.
ATTY. NESTOR MONDOK 10
Professor, Statutory Construction
COLLEGE OF LAW
UNIVERSITY OF THE CORDILLERAS
- states the reasons and objectives of the enactment.
It is that part of statute explaining the reasons for its enactment and the objects sought to
be accomplished. Usually it starts with the word whereas. Generally, a preamble is a
declaration by the legislature of the reasons for the passage of the statute and is helpful in
the interpretation of any ambiguities within the statute which it is prefixed (People vs.
Purisima, 86 SCRA 542)
Points to remember:
(i) A preamble does not create a right nor does it grant any right.
C) Words, Phrases and Sentences, Context- The intention of the legislature must primarily
be determined from the language of the statute and such language consist of the words,
phrases and sentences used therein. The meaning of the law should , however, be taken
from the general consideration of the law as a whole and not from any single part, portion
or section or from isolated words and phrases, clauses, or sentences used.
D) Punctuation It is an aid of low degree in interpreting the language of a statute and can
never control against the intelligible meaning of a written word. However, if the
punctuation of a statute gives it a meaning that is reasonable and in apparent accord with
the legislative will, it may be used as an additional argument for adopting the literal
meaning of the word thus punctuated.
Implicit here is the presumption that the legislature knows the language it used, its rules
on grammar and the specific function of punctuation marks thus used.
It may be used as an additional argument for adopting the literal meaning of
the words thus punctuated but can never control against the intelligible
meaning of a written word.
It is an aid of low degree in interpreting the language of a statute and can
never control against the intelligible meaning of a written word. However, if
the punctuation of a statute gives it a meaning that is reasonable and in
apparent accord with the legislative will, it may be used as an additional
argument for adopting the literal meaning of the words thus punctuated.
E) Headings and Marginal Notes If the meaning of the statute is clear of is the text of the
statute is clear, they will prevail as against the headings, specially is the headings have
been prepared by compilers and not by the legislature.
It determines the scope of the provisions and their relation to other
portions of the act, however, if the meaning of the statute or if its text is
clear, it will prevail as against the heading, if the latter has been prepared
by compilers and not the legislature.
F) Body It contains the subject matter of the statute. The body of the statute should
embrace only one subject matter expressed in the Title as required by the Constitution .
It is the main operative part of the statute containing its substantive and even procedural
provisions. Provisos and exceptions may also be found in the body of the statute. (Diaz,
page 21)
The enacting clause is not essential to the validity of the law but this clause
clothes the statute with a certain dignity because the specific authority that promulgated
the law is therein stated.
H) Body It contains the subject matter of the statute. The body of the statute should
embrace only one subject matter expressed in the Title as required by the Constitution .
It is the main operative part of the statute containing its substantive and even procedural
provisions. Provisos and exceptions may also be found in the body of the statute. (Diaz,
page 21)
I) Exceptions and Provisos- It is a clause added to an enactment for the purpose of acting as
restraint upon or as qualification of, the generality of the language it follows.
J) Interpretative clause That part of the statute where the legislature defines its own
language or prescribes rules for its construction.
Legislative Definition and Interpretation If the legislature have defined the word/s used
in a statute and has declared the construction to be places thereon, such definition or
construction should be followed by the courts.
The rules are as follows:
i)If a law provides that in case of doubt it should be construed and interpreted in a
certain manner, the court should follow such an instruction. This is part of the law
making power of the legislature and should not be regarded as part of the power of
other department to interpret (Judiciary). This may be found in the interpretative
clause of the law. Example of the manner of construction -Art. 4 of the Labor Code
ii) in case of conflict between the interpretation clauses and the legislative meaning,
as revealed by the statute when considered in its totality, the latter shall prevail.
iii) A term is used throughout the statute in the same sense in which it was first
defined unless it can be shown that it is being used in a different context in the
succeeding part of the law.
iv) Legislative definition of similar terms on the statute may be resorted to except
where a particular law expressly declares that its definition therein is limited in
application to the statutes in which they appear.
definition of the legislature of the words used in the stature and the construction to
be placed thereon. The rules are as follows:
- If a law provides that in case of doubt, it should be construed and
interpreted in a certain manner that the courts should follow such instructions.
K) Repealing clause That part of the statute which announces the legislative intent to
terminate or revoke another statute or statutes
That part of the statute which announces the prior statutes or specific provisions which
have been abrogated by reason of the enactment of the new law. (Diaz, page 21)
L) Saving clause This restrict a repealing act and preserves existing powers, rights and
pending proceedings from the effect of the repeal.
A restriction in a repealing act which is intended to save rights, proceeding, penalties,
etc., from the annihilation which would result from an unrestricted repeal. (Diaz, page
21)
M) Separability clause It is a clause which states that if for any reason any section or
provision of the statute is held to be unconstitutional or revoked, the other section or
provision of the law shall not be affected thereby.
That part of the statute which provides or shows the intention of the legislature that in
the event that one or more provisions of the law are nullified, declared void or
unconstitutional , the remaining provisions which can stand by themselves without the
nullified parts, shall still be in force. (Diaz, page 21)
Points to remember:
(i) A separability clause creates a presumption that the legislature intended separability
rather than complete nullity of the statute. This means that is one part of the statute is
void or unconstitutional, the other parts thereof which are valid may still stand.
(ii) This general rule, however, is subject to the limitation that if the part of the statute are
so mutually dependent and connected thereby creating a belief that the legislature
intended them as a whole, the nullity or unconstitutionality of one part may vitiate the
rest.
N) Effectivity clause That part of the statute which announces the time or date when the
law will become effective.
Note: Difference between the effectivity of the law (Tanada vs. Tuvera) from when a
bill becomes a law.
II. CONSTRUCTION - the act or process of ascertaining the intention of the author/s
of the law employing extrinsic aid.
It is the drawing of conclusions with respect to subject that are beyond the direct expression
of the text from elements known and given in the text (Diaz, page 2);
Construction is the drawing of warranted conclusion respecting subjects that lie beyond the
direct expression of the text; conclusions which are in the spirit, though not within the letter of
the text. (Agpalo, page 104)
EXTRINSIC AIDS those found outside the written language of the law. Extrinsic aid can
only be resorted to after intrinsic aid have been used and exhausted.
ATTY. NESTOR MONDOK 13
Professor, Statutory Construction
COLLEGE OF LAW
UNIVERSITY OF THE CORDILLERAS
- Extraneous facts, circumstances of means of explanation resorted to for the purpose of
determining the legislative intent.
- drawing conclusions respecting subjects that lie beyond the direct expression of the text.
- It can only be resorted when intrinsic aids have been used and exhausted.
b. Policy- the general policy of the law or the settled policy of the state which
induced the enactment may enlighten the interpreter of the laws as to the intention
of the legislature enacting the same.
c. Legislative History of the State- may be found in the reports of the legislative
committees in the transcript of stenographic notes taken during hearings,
investigation and debates.
ERECTORS INC. Vs. NLRC, HON. JULIO ANDRES JR and
FLORENCIO BURGOS (GR NO. 104215, MAY 8, 1996)- intention because of
amendments.
d. Contemporaneous and Practical Construction- those who lived near or at the
time when the law was enacted were more acquainted of the conditions why the
law was enacted. Their understanding and application of the law, especially if the
same has been construed by the judicial tribunals and legal profession, deserve to
be considered by the courts.
(NOTE: Extrinsic aids are entitled to respect, consideration and weight but the
courts are at liberty to decide whether they are applicable or not to the case
brought before it for consideration.)
*Construction and Interpretation thus differ from each other, the former uses intrinsic aid
while the latter employs extrinsic aid. Both, however, have the same purpose - and that is to
ascertain and give effect to the legislative intent so you can use them at the same time. If not-
you must used intrinsic aid first before resorting to extrinsic aid because of the principle speech
is the index of intention.
PURPOSE deals with the reason why the law was made, the remedy it seeks to achieve,
the mischief it seeks to prevent etc. It deals with the GOAL /OBJECTIVE of the law.
INTENTION has something to do with the meaning and the when, how or to whom the
law will apply. It deals with the manner of APLLICATION of the law. Meaning of the word,
phrase, punctuations etc.
Relate to:
COMPLETENESS TEST
SUFFICENT STANDARD TEST
Rule: In determining the intention of the legislature, courts should resort first to
interpretation (intrinsic aid) before resorting to construction (extrinsic aid)
Exegesis
INTRINSIC GUIDES
Use of Latin Maxims:
(See : CANONS- TEXTUAL)
A) VERBA LEGIS
If the statute is clear, plain and free from ambiguity, it must be given its literal meaning
and applied without interpretation. This is rule rests on the valid presumption that the words
employed by the legislature in a statute correctly express its intention or will and preclude the
court from construing it differently. The legislature is presumed to know the meaning of the
words, to have used words advisedly, and to have expressed its intent by use of such words as are
found in the statute.[1] It is also known as "verba legis".
Plain Meaning
When writing statutes, the legislature intends to use ordinary English words in their
ordinary senses. The United States Supreme Court discussed the plain meaning rule in Caminetti
v. United States, 242 U.S. 470 (1917), reasoning "[i]t is elementary that the meaning of a statute
must, in the first instance, be sought in the language in which the act is framed, and if that is
plain... the sole function of the courts is to enforce it according to its terms." And if a statute's
language is plain and clear, the Court further warned that "the duty of interpretation does not
arise, and the rules which are to aid doubtful meanings need no discussion."
VERBA LEGIS (Plain- meaning Rule)- if a statute is clear, plain and free from ambiguity, it
must be given its literal meaning and applied without attempted interpretation. This rule rest on
the presumption that the words employed by the legislature in a statute correctly expresses its
intent or will and thus, thus precluding the court from construing it differently.
The language of the statute affords the best means of its exposition and legislative intent
must be determined primarily therefrom. It is the duty of the court to give the statute the
interpretation its language calls for. The court is not to speculate as to the probable intent of the
legislature apart from the words. Popular clamor as to the enforcement of a law adds nothing to,
and detract nothing from the duty of the court to construe the law as it is. The law may
sometimes be harsh but if it is so written and intended by the legislature, the courts have no
recourse but to apply it. (DURA LEX SED LEX)
**Thus, where what is not clearly provided in the law is read into the law by construction
because it is more logical and wise, it will be to encroach upon legislative prerogative to define
the wisdom of the law, which is judicial legislation( Rizal Commercial Bank Corporation vs.
IAC , 320 SCRA 279, (1999).
ATTY. NESTOR MONDOK 16
Professor, Statutory Construction
COLLEGE OF LAW
UNIVERSITY OF THE CORDILLERAS
Whether a statute is wise or expedient is not for the courts to determine. Court must
administer the law, not as they think it ought to be but as they find it and without regard to
consequences. (Director of Lands vs. Abaya, 63 Phil. 559, (1936).
*The apparent presumption here is that the legislature is presumed to know the meaning
of the word, to have used it advisedly, and to have expressed its intent by the use of such
words as are found in the statute.(Aparri vs. CA, G.R. No. 30057, January 31, 1984)
a) VERBA LEGIS NON EST RECEDENDUM- from the words of the statute there
should be no departure.
c) ABSOLUTA SENTENTIA NON INDIGET- When the language of the law is clear,
no explanation of it is required.
Absolute Sentencia Expositore Non Indiget
- When the language of the law is clear, no explanation of it is required.
d) DURA LEX SED LEX the law may be harsh but that is the law.
Dura Lex Sed Lex (The law may be harsh but it is the law.)
- The reason for the rule is that the legislature must be presumed to know the
meaning of the words, to have used the words advisedly and to have expressed its intent
by the use of such words as are found in the statute.
e) HOC QUIDEM PERQUAM DURUM EST, SED ITA LEX SCRIPTA EST- it is
exceedingly hard but so the law is written. (the law may be exceedingly harsh but it is
so written)
f) AEQUITAS NUNQUAM CONTRAVENIT LEGIS Equity never acts in
contravention of the law. (Aguila vs. CFI of Batangas, 160 SCRA 352 (1988).
g) MALEDICTA EST EXPOSITIO QUAE CORRUMPIT TEXTUM- it is dangerous
construction which is against the text (Victoria vs. COMELEC, 229 SCRA 269
(1994).
OPPOSITE MAXIMS: Literal import or meaning must yield to its apparent intent,
purpose or spirit.
Relative and qualifying words, phrases and clauses are to be applied to the word or
phrase immediately preceding and not to others more remote.
Ejusdem generis (eh-youse-dem generous) adj. Latin for "of the same kind," used to
interpret loosely written statutes. Where a law lists specific classes of persons or things and then
refers to them in general, the general statements only apply to the same kind of persons or things
specifically listed. Example: if a law refers to automobiles, trucks, tractors, motorcycles and
other motor-powered vehicles, "vehicles" would not include airplanes, since the list was of land-
based transportation.
.In the construction of laws, wills and other instruments, when certain things are
enumerated, and then a phrase is used which might be construed to include other things, it is
generally confined to things ejusdem generas; as, where an act (9 Ann. C. 20) provided that a
writ of quo warranto might issue against persons who should usurp "the offices of mayors,
bailiffs, port reeves, and other offices, within the cities, towns, corporate boroughs, and places,
within Great Britain," &c.; it was held that "other offices" meant offices ejusdem generis; and
that the word "places" signified places of the same kind; that is, that the offices must be
corporate offices, and the places must be corporate Places. 5 T. R. 375,379; 5 B. & C. 640; 8 D.
& Ry. 393; 1 B. & C. 237.
3. So, in the construction of wills, when certain articles are enumerated, the terra goods is to
ATTY. NESTOR MONDOK 18
Professor, Statutory Construction
COLLEGE OF LAW
UNIVERSITY OF THE CORDILLERAS
be restricted to those ejusdem generis. Bac. Ab. Legacies, B; 3 Rand. 191; 3 Atk. 61; Abr. Eq.
201; 2 Atk. 113.
When a list of two or more specific descriptors is followed by more general descriptors,
the otherwise wide meaning of the general descriptors must be restricted to the same class, if any,
of the specific words that precede them. For example, where "cars, motor bikes, motor powered
vehicles" are mentioned, the word "vehicles" would be interpreted in a limited sense (therefore
vehicles cannot be interpreted as including airplanes).
Where the general term follows the designation of particular things or classes of persons
or subjects, the general term will be construed to include only those things or persons of the same
class, kind or nature as those specifically enumerated.
* The purpose of the rule is to give effect to both the particular and the general
words by treating the particular words indicating the class and the general words as
including all that is embraced in the said class, although not specifically named by the
particular words. This is justified on the ground that if the legislature intended the general
terms to be used in their unrestricted sense, it would not have made an enumeration of the
particular subjects but would have also used only general terms
* The principle applies when specific words preceding the general expression are
of the same nature.
* Where of they are of different genra, the meaning of the general word remains
unaffected by its connection with them.
D) EXRESSIO UNIUS EST EXCLUSIO ALTERIUS (The express mention of one thing
excludes all others)
Items not on the list are assumed not to be covered by the statute. However, sometimes a
list in a statute is illustrative, not exclusionary. This is usually indicated by a word such as
"includes" or "such as."
The express mention of one person, thing, or consequence implies the exclusion of all others.
- Mention of one thing implies the exclusion of another
When a statute enumerates the subjects or things on which it is to operate, it is to be
construed as excluding from its effect all those not expressly mentioned.
CASE: ESCRIBANO V. AVILA G.R. NO. 30375, September 12, 1978, 85 SCRA 245
- SARMIENTO III VS. MISON (L-79974, DEC. 17, 1987) - Sec 16, Art VII of
the 1987 Constitution. (Appointment by the president without the approval of the
commission on appointment.
See:
CASUS OMISUS
Casus Omisus
- Under this rule, the words or phrases may be supplied by the courts and inserted
in a statute where that is necessary to eliminate repugnancy and inconsistency in the
statute and to complete the sense thereof, and to give effect to the intention of the
legislature manifested therein. The rule is especially applicable where such application is
necessary to prevent the law from becoming a nullity. This rule is also used to supply
omissions occasioned by clerical errors, by accident or inadvertence.
When a statute is ambiguous, its meaning may be determined in light of other statutes on
the same subject matter.
When a word is ambiguous, its meaning may be determined by reference to the rest of the
statute.
Noscitur a Sociis
- Under this rule, the meaning of particular terms in a statute may be ascertained
by reference to words associated with or related to them in a statute.
- Where particular word or phrase in a statute is ambiguous in itself, or is simply
susceptible of various meanings, its true meaning may be made clear and specific by
considering the company of words in which it is found or which it is associated.
- Where there are two or more words of ambiguous meaning together in a statute,
they are understood to be used in their cognate sense to express the same relations and
give color and expression to each word.
- Where a law does not define a word therein, it will be construed as having a
meaning- similar to that of words associated or accompanied by it.
(READ: Caltex vs. Palomar, September 29, 1966, 18 SCRA 247)
NOSCITUR A SOCIIS
Words must be construed in conjunction with the other words and phrases used in the
text. Legislative intent must be ascertained from a consideration of the statute as a whole. The
particular words, clauses and phrases should not be studied as detached and isolated expressions,
but the whole and every part of the statute must be considered in fixing the meaning of any of its
parts and in order to produce a harmonious whole. 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 clear and specific by considering the company in which it is found or with which it is
associated.
Aisporna vs. CA: wife of insurance agent prosecuted for having sold an insurance without
registering as an agent. Using this doctrine, the Court ruled that an insurance agent is one who
sells insurance in return for compensation, and it was not proved that Aisporna received
compensation for the insurance she was alleged to have sold. (Her defense was that as her
husbands clerk, she only renewed the insurance because her husband was out at the time).
Dai-Chi Electronics Manufacturing Corp. v. Villarama: Dai-Chi filed a complaint against
Villarama for violating an agreement that he would not join the companys competitor within two
years after leaving Dai-Chi. Dai-Chi filed a complaint against Villarama at the RTC, which
dismissed it on grounds of lack of jurisdiction, for it should have been filed before a labor arbiter.
Using the doctrine of noscitur a sociis, the court ruled that while the Labor Code says that all
money claims of workers were under the jurisdiction of the Labor Arbiter, it did not mean to
encompass the entire universe of money claims that might be asserted by workers against their
employers. Paragraph 3 should not be read in isolation, but rather in conjunction with paragraphs
1 to 5, which all refer to money claims of workers arising from violations of or in connection
with an employee-employer relationship. Dai-Chis complaint was anchored on a violation of
contract, since Villarama was no longer an employee. The court ruled that the RTC was the
proper venue for filing of the case.
When a list of words has a modifying phrase at the end, the phrase refers only to the last,
e.g., firemen, policemen, and doctors in a hospital. (huh!!!!!!??????)- doctrine of last
antecedent
H) GENERALIA SPECIALIBUS NON DEROGANT (The general does not detract from the
specific)
Described in The Vera Cruz (1884) 10 App. Cas. 59 as: "Now if anything be certain it is
this, that where there are general words in a later Act capable of reasonable and sensible
application without extending them to subjects specially dealt with by earlier legislation,
you are not to hold that earlier legislation indirectly repealed, altered, or derogated from
merely by force of such general words, without any evidence of a particular intention to
do so." This means that if a later law and an earlier law are potentially - but not
necessarily - in conflict, courts will adopt the reading that does not result in an implied
repeal of the earlier statute. Lawmaking bodies usually need to be explicit if they intend
to repeal an earlier law
L) MENS LEGISLATORES
- The courts look into the object to be accomplished, the evils and mischief to be
remedied or the purpose to be observed. The court should give the statute a reasonable or
liberal construction which will best effect its purpose rather than one which will defeat it
even though such construction is not within the strict literal interpretation of the statute.
- The court should give the statute a reasonable or liberal construction which will
best effect its purpose rather than one which will defeat it.
- Statutes must be construed to avoid injustice
A. POWER TO CONSTRUE
A. CONTEMPORARY CONSTRUCTION
Hoc quidem perquam durum est, sed ita lex scripta est.
It is exceedingly hard, but so the law is written.
Quando verba statute sunt speciali, ratio autem generalia, statum generaliter est
intelligendum.
When the words used in a statute are special, but the purpose of the law is general, it should be
read as the general expression.
Jurae naturae aequum est neminem cum alterius detrimento et injuria fieri locupletiorem.
It is certainly not agreeable to natural justice that a stranger should reap the pecuniary produce of
another mans work.
Ibi quid generaliter conceditur, inest haec exception, si non aliquid sit contras jus basque.
Where anything is granted generally, exemption from rigid application of law is implied; that
nothing shall be contrary to law and right.
IMPLICATIONS
Ex necessitate legis.
By the necessary implication of law.
Cui jurisdiction data est, ea quoque concessa esse videntur sine quibus jurisdiction explicari
non potuit.
When jurisdiction is given, all powers and means essential to its exercise are also given.
A. IN GENERAL
ASSOCIATED WORDS
Noscitur a sociis.
A thing is known by its associates.
Ejesdem generis.
Of the same kind or species.
Argumentum a contrario.
Negative-Opposite Doctrine: what is expressed puts an end to that which is implied.
Injustum est, nisi tota lege inspecta, de una aliqua ejus particula proposita indicare vel
respondere.
It is unjust to decide or to respond as to any particular part of a law without examining the whole
of the law.
Nemo enim aliquam partem recte intelligere possit antequam totum interum atque interim
perlegit.
The sense and meaning of the law is collected by viewing all the parts together as one whole and
not of one part only by itself.
Verba posterima propter certitudinem addita ad priora quae certitudine indigent sunt
referenda.
Reference should be made to a subsequent section in order to explain a previous clause of which
the meaning is doubtful.
Pari materia.
Of the same matter.
Mutatis mutandis.
With the necessary changes.
A. IN GENERAL
Strictissimi juris.
Follow the law strictly.
A. MANDATORY STATUTES
A. IN GENERAL
Leges quae retrospciunt, et magna cum cautione sunt adhibendae neque enim janus locatur
in legibus.
Laws which are retrospective are rarely and cautiously received, for Janus has really no place in
the laws.
Leges et constitutiones futuris certum est dare formam negotiis, non ad facta praeterita
revocari, nisi nominatim et de praeterito tempore et adhuc pendentibus negotiis cautum sit.
Laws should be construed as prospective, not retrospective, unless they are expressly made
applicable to past transactions and to such as are still pending.
A. REPEAL
In obscuris inspici solere quod versimilius est, aut quod plerumque fieri solet.
When matters are obscure, it is customary to take what appears to be more likely or what usually
often happens.
CANONS
Canons
Also known as canons of construction, canons give common sense guidance to courts in
interpreting the meaning of statutes. Most canons emerge from the common law process through
the choices of judges. Proponents of the use of canons argue that the canons constrain
judges and limit the ability of the courts to legislate from the bench. Critics argue that a
judge always has a choice between competing canons that lead to different results, so
judicial discretion is only hidden through the use of canons, not reduced.
A) Textual
Textual canons are rules of thumb for understanding the words of the text. Some of the
canons are still known by their traditional Latin names.
Plain Meaning
\ When writing statutes, the legislature intends to use ordinary English words in their
ordinary senses. The United States Supreme Court discussed the plain meaning rule in Caminetti
v. United States, 242 U.S. 470 (1917), reasoning "[i]t is elementary that the meaning of a statute
must, in the first instance, be sought in the language in which the act is framed, and if that is
plain... the sole function of the courts is to enforce it according to its terms." And if a statute's
language is plain and clear, the Court further warned that "the duty of interpretation does not
arise, and the rules which are to aid doubtful meanings need no discussion."
When a list of two or more specific descriptors is followed by more general descriptors,
the otherwise wide meaning of the general descriptors must be restricted to the same class, if any,
of the specific words that precede them. For example, where "cars, motor bikes, motor powered
vehicles" are mentioned, the word "vehicles" would be interpreted in a limited sense (therefore
vehicles cannot be interpreted as including airplanes).
Expressio unius est exclusio alterius (The express mention of one thing excludes all others)
Exclusionary rule/maxim
When a statute is ambiguous, its meaning may be determined in light of other statutes on
the same subject matter.
When a word is ambiguous, its meaning may be determined by reference to the rest of the
statute.
Let each be put in its proper place - a transposition of words and clause may be resorted
to where the sentence or clause is without meaning as it stands.
Also distributive Under this principle, where a sentence has several antecedents an
several consequents, they are to be read distributively. The antecedent should be referred to the
appropriate consequents and vice versa.
Each word or phrase must be given its proper connection in order to give it proper force
and effect, rendering none of them useless or superfluous.
When a list of words has a modifying phrase at the end, the phrase refers only to the last,
e.g., firemen, policemen, and doctors in a hospital.
Generalia specialibus non derogant (The general does not detract from the specific)
Described in The Vera Cruz (1884) 10 App. Cas. 59 as: "Now if anything be certain it is
this, that where there are general words in a later Act capable of reasonable and sensible
application without extending them to subjects specially dealt with by earlier legislation, you are
not to hold that earlier legislation indirectly repealed, altered, or derogated from merely by force
of such general words, without any evidence of a particular intention to do so." This means that
if a later law and an earlier law are potentially - but not necessarily - in conflict, courts will adopt
the reading that does not result in an implied repeal of the earlier statute. Lawmaking bodies
usually need to be explicit if they intend to repeal an earlier law.
B) Substantive
Substantive canons instruct the court to favor interpretations that promote certain values
or policy results.
Statute does not violate fundamental societal values. See, for example, Holy Trinity
Church v. United States, 143 U.S. 457 (1892).
Rule of Lenity
In construing an ambiguous criminal statute, the court should resolve the ambiguity in
favor of the defendant. See McNally v. United States, 483 U.S. 350 (1987); See, e.g.,
Muscarello v. U.S., 524 U.S. 125 (1998) (declining to apply the rule of lenity); Evans v.
U.S., 504 U.S. 255 (1992) (Thomas, J., dissenting); Scarborough v. U.S., 431 U.S. 563
(1977) (Stewart, J., dissenting); See United States v. Santos (2008).
See Gregory v. Ashcroft, 501 U.S. 452 (1991); see also Gonzales v. Oregon, 546 U.S. 243
(2006); see also Nevada Dept. of Human Resources v. Hibbs, 538 U.S. 721 (2003)
C) Deference
Deference canons instruct the court to defer to the interpretation of another institution,
such as an administrative agency or Congress. These canons reflect an understanding that
the judiciary is not the only branch of government entrusted with constitutional
responsibility.
If a statute administered by an agency is ambiguous with respect to the specific issue, the
courts will defer to the agency's reasonable interpretation of the statute. This rule of
deference was formulated in the US by the United States Supreme Court in Chevron v.
Natural Resources Defense Council, 467 U.S. 837 (1984).
Avoiding Absurdity
Leges posteriores priores contrarias abrogant (Subsequent laws repeal those before enacted to
the contrary, aka "Last in Time")
Criticism
Critics of the use of canons argue that canons impute some sort of "omniscience" to the
legislator, suggesting that it is aware of the canons when constructing the laws. In addition,
it is argued that the canons give a credence to judges who want to construct the law a certain
way, imparting a false sense of justification to their otherwise arbitrary process. In a classic
article, Karl Llewellyn argued that every canon had a "counter-canon" that would lead to the
opposite interpretation of the statute.[8]
However, it could be argued that the fundamental nature of language is to blame for the problem
of "for every canon, a counter." Interpreting whether a statute applies to a given set of facts often
boils down to analyzing whether a single word or short phrase covers some element of the
factual situation before the judge. The expansiveness of language necessarily means that
there will often be good (or equally unconvincing) arguments for two competing
interpretations. A judge is then forced to resort to documentation of legislative intent, which
may also be unhelpful, and then finally to his or her own judgment of what outcome is ultimately
fair and logical under the totality of the circumstances. Canons of statutory construction give
judges the ability to decide questions of statutory interpretation that necessarily rely on an
element of judicial discretion.
Chapter 2
PRESUMPTIONS
Presumption of Validity
Every statute passed by the legislature is presumed to be valid because the
legislature is supposed to have considered the question of its validity before approving it.
The legislative department of the government itself first determines the question of validity of
every statute- even the president when the bill is submitted to his office for approval (executive
department). In cases of doubt, the court resolves in favor of its validity.
Presumption of Constitutionality
The presumption is always in favor of constitutionality. However, if the statute is
really unconstitutional, the courts are not only authorized but must declare its
unconstitutionality. The court must see to it that the other departments have not exceeded
their constitutional authority. (Essence of Separation of Powers and System of Check and
Balance)
- ABAKADA GURO PARTY vs. HON. CESAR PURISIMA (GR NO. 166715, AUG.
14,2008)
A law enacted by Congress enjoys a strong presumption of constitutionality. To justify
its nullification, there must be a clrar and unequivocal breach of the Constitution, not a
doubtful and equivocal one. (CENTRAL BANK EMPLOYEES ASSOCIATION INC.
A statute shall not be interpreted so as to be inconsistent with other statutes. Where there is
an inconsistency, the judiciary will attempt to provide a harmonious interpretation.
Presumption of Jurisdiction
A statute will not be construed in such a manner as to oust or restrict the
jurisdiction of the superior courts or to vest a new jurisdiction in them, unless, there are
express words or a necessary implication to the effect.
Doctrine of Incorporation- holds that every state is, by reason of its membership
in the family of nations, bound by the generally accepted principles of
international law.
COURSE OUTLINE
STATUTORY CONSTRUCTION
CONSTRUCTION & INTERPRETATION
He says: You are the one I love the most among the women in my life, and that includes my
mother, my sister and my grandmother. You ask him, Is that ejusdem generis or expressio
unius? And he answers, Ejusdem generis. Should you slap him or kiss him?
Heres a short reviewer on some Latin phrases in Legal Method. The phrases are followed by a
very short description of cases that illustrate the Latin rule. The definitions are taken from
Agpalos book on Statutory Construction.