Statutory Construction by Atty.

Luardo
Possible Pointers for Finals (UC LAW)
Credits to: Nwuybi and Tacio xo
STATUTES STATUTORY CONSTRUCTION RULES
“An act of the Legislative as an organized body, expressed in the form, and passed according to the Ratio Legis: Spirit of the law/Legislative Intent as the Primary Object
procedure, required to constitute it as part of the law of the land.” interpretation according to the spirit or reason of the law; reason of the law is its soul.
Distinguished from As expressed in the literal reading of the text
Constitution- Fundamental law of the land, which establishes the character and basic principles of General rule: if statute is clear, plain and free from ambiguity, it must be given its literal meaning and
the government. A constitution is a system of fundamental law for the governance and applied without attempted interpretation
administration of a nation. It is supreme, imperious, absolute, and unalterable except by Verba legis (literal or plain meaning rule)
the authority from which it emanates. If the language of the statute is plain and free from ambiguity, and express a single, definite, and
Ordinances - act passed by the local legislative body in the exercise of its law-making authority. sensible meaning, that meaning is conclusively presumed to be the meaning which the legislature
AN ORDINANCE SHOULD NOT CONTRAVENE A STATUTE intended to convey.
Local councils exercise only delegated legislative powers conferred on them by Congress as CASE:
the national law-making body. The delegate cannot be superior to the principal. Bustamante v. NLRC, 265 SCRA 61
Administrative orders- Enforceable order issued by a public authority (under the powers conferred to Issue: WON an illegally dismissed employee would be entitled of his computed backwages to which until
it by one or more statutes) to an individual or an organization to take certain corrective action, or to his actual reinstatement
refrain from an activity. Ratio: The clear legislative intent of the amendment in RA 6715 (Labor Code) is to give more benefits to
workers than was previously given them under the Mercury Drug rule or the 1st way
Classification 3 ways: 1 st – before Labor Code – to be deducted from the amount of backwages is the earnings
According to duration: permanent vs. temporary elsewhere during the period of illegal dismissal
Permanent- one whose operation is not limited in duration but continues until repealed 2nd – Labor Code Art. 279 – the amount of backwages is fixed without deductions or qualifications but
Temporary - duration is for a limited period of time fixed in the statute itself or whose life ceases upon limited to not more than 3 years
the happening of an event. 3rd – amended Art. 279 – full backwages or without deductions from the time the laborer’s
Exc: law with sunset clause; emergency measures (Read Sec. 23(2), Article VI of the 1987 Constitution) compensation was withheld until his actual reinstatement
Case: Araneta v. Dinglasan, G.R. No. L-2044, August 26, 1949 IBAA Employees Union v. Inciong, 132 SCRA 663
WON CA 671 has already ceased when Congress met in session WON monthly paid employees are excluded from the benefit of holiday pay?
Ruling: Yes, CA 671 ceased to operate when Congrees met in session. No. It is elementary in the rules of statutory construction that when the language of the law is clear and
Under the rules of statutory construction, in order to classify the duration of an act it’s intention has unequivocal the law must be taken to mean exactly what it says.
to be sought for in its nature, the object to be accomplish, the purpose to be subserved, and its In the case at bar, Provisions of the Labor Code on the entitlement to the benefits of holiday pay are
relation to the Constitution. clear and explicit- it provides for both the coverage of and exclusion from the benefits. In Policy
In the case at bar, Commonwealth Act No. 671 was promulgated in accordance with Article VI of the Instruction 9, the then Secretary of Labor categorically state that the benefit is principally intended for
Constitution, which provides that any law passed by virtue thereof should be "for a limited period." daily paid employees, when the law clearly states that every worker shall be paid their regular holiday
"Limited" has been defined to mean "restricted; bounded; prescribed; confined within positive pay.
bounds; restrictive in duration, extent or scope." It is to be presumed that Commonwealth Act No. *While it is true that the contemporaneous construction placed upon a statue by executive officers
671 was approved with this limitation in view. The opposite theory would make the law repugnant whose duty is to enforce it should be given great weight by the courts, still if such construction is so
to the Constitution, and is contrary to the principle that the legislature is deemed to have full erroneous, the same must be declared as null and void.
knowledge of the constitutional scope of its powers. The assertion that new legislation is needed to Chartered Bank Employees Association v. Ople, 138 SCRA 273
repeal the act would not be in harmony with the Constitution either. If a new and different law were WON the Ministry of Labor is correct in maintaining that monthly paid employees are not entitled to the
necessary to terminate the delegation, the period for the delegation, it has been correctly pointed holiday pay nor all employees who rendered work during said legal holiday are entitled to the premium
out, would be unlimited, indefinite, negative and uncertain; "that which was intended to meet a or overtime pay differentials?
temporary emergency may become permanent law," Under the rules of statutory construction, When the language of the law is clear and unequivocal the law
must be taken to mean exactly what it says.
1
In the case at bar, the provisions of the Labor Code on the entitlement to the benefits of holiday pay are
clear and explicit it provides for both the coverage of and exclusion from the benefit.
 Statutory Construction by Atty. Luardo
Possible Pointers for Finals (UC LAW)
Credits to: Nwuybi and Tacio xo
CONSTITUTIONAL CONSTRUCTION CITIZENS OF THE PHILIPPINES GIVEN RETROACTIVE
Primary purpose: to ascertain the intent or purpose of the framers EFFECT
primary task of constitutional construction is to ascertain the intent or purpose of the framers of the Respondents declared Jose Ong Jr., elected representative of Northern
Samar, as a natural born Filipino citizen. Petitioners contend that based on the 1987
constitution as expressed in its language
Constitution, Jose Ong, Jr. who was born on June 19, 1948 (during which the 1935
purpose of our Constitution: to protect and enhance the people’s interests Constitution was operative), is not a natural born Filipino citizen having been born to
Doctrine of constitutional supremacy - if a law or contract violates any norm of the a Chinese father, Jose Ong Chuan and a Filipina mother Agrifina Lao.
constitution, that law or contract whether promulgated by the legislative, or by the executive ISSUE:
branch or entered into by private persons for private purposes is null and void and without any force 1. W/N people who have elected Philippine citizenship under the 1935
or effect. Constitution are to be considered natural born Filipino citizens.
Constitution is a living, document, it evolves with time. 2. W/N this provision should be applied retroactively.
GR: constitutional provision is self-executing if the nature and extent of the right conferred and HELD:
the liability imposed are fixed by the constitution itself. Yes. Under the doctrine of constitutional construction, primary task of constitutional construction is to ascertain
the intent or purpose of the framers of the constitution as expressed in its language in order to protect and
EXC. When it is expressly provided that a legislative act is necessary to
enhance people’s interest. In the case at bar, Sec. 1(3) Art. 4 of the 1987 Constitution states that those born before
enforce a constitutional mandate, the presumption now is that all January 17, 1973 of Filipino mothers, who elect Philippine citizenship upon reaching the age of majority” are
provisions of the constitution are self-executing. citizens of the Philippines has a retroactive effect as shown to the clear intent of the framers through the language
In case of doubt, the Constitution should be considered self-executing used. They need not perform any
rather than non-self-executing, unless the contrary is clearly intended. act of “election” granted that his father was naturalized and declared a Filipino citizen by 1957, when he was only 9
*Non-self-executing provisions would give the legislature discretion to years old. The provision in question must be applied retroactively since it is curative in nature. It is explicit that the
determine when, or whether, they shall be effective, subordinated to the intent of the framers is to seek remedy to the the inequitable situation under the 1935 Constitution wherein
will of the law-making body. people born of Filipino fathers and alien mothers were considered natural born while children born of
Filipino mothers and alien fathers were not.
CASE:
Rules of Constitutional Construction
JM Tuason & Co., Inc. v. Land Tenure Administration, 31 SCRA 413 (1970) Apply rules of Statutory Construction
Petitioner is the owner of a land called Tatalon Estate in Quezon City. They Doctrines used in Sarmiento v. Mison is a good example in which the SC applied a number of rules of statutory
seek to nullify RA 2616 which directs the expropriation of two lots inside the estate. construction.
Under Art. 8, Sec. 4 of the Constitution, “The Congress may authorize, upon payment Case: Sarmiento v. Mison, 156 SCRA 549 (1987)
of just compensation, the expropriation of lands to be subdivided into small lots and Petitioners question the validity of appointment of Respondent as
conveyed at cost to individuals” Petitioner contends that said law is unconstitutional Commissioner of the Bureau of Customs on the ground that it was not confirmed by
because the provision in the Constitution refers to “lands” not landed estates. the Commission on Appointments. The Court favored the Respondent based on
ISSUE: express provisions of the 1987 Constitution.
ISSUE:
W/N RA 2616 is unconstitutional.
W/N the appointment of a Commissioner of Customs is subject to confirmation by the Commission on
HELD: appointments
No. Under the rules of constitutional construction, The fundamental principle of constitutional HELD:
construction is to give effect to the intent of the framers of the organic law and of the people No. Under the doctrine of constitutional construction, primary task of constitutional construction is to ascertain the
adopting it. intent or purpose of the framers of the constitution as expressed in its language in order to protect and enhance
In the case at bar, The Constitution clearly states that “land” not “landed estates” can be people’s interest.
expropriated. It has a broader scope, allowing the legislature to expropriate more types of In the case at bar, Sec. 16 Art. 7 only provides for the appointment, by the President of “heads of executive
land. The law does not distinguish between different types regardless of how big or small it departments, ambassadors, other public ministers and consuls,officers of the armed forces from the rank of colonel
or naval captain, and other officers whose appointments are vested in him in this Constitution” with
may be, as long as there is a need to address a growing social problem such as inequality. The
the requirement of CA approval. Deliberations of the Constitutional Commission reveal that the framers intended
Constitution 1935, authorized the broad power of the Congress. Consti responsive to future needs. to strike a "middle ground" in order to reconcile the extreme set-ups in both the 1935 and 1973 Constitutions. As
Words are to be given their ordinary meaning. Why? bc the consti is not a lawyer’s document unless such, while the President may make appointments to positions that require confirmation by the Commission on
technical terms are employed.
2
Appointments, the 1987 Constitution also grants her the power to make appointments on her own without the
need for confirmation by the legislature. (cassus omissus)
Co v. Electoral Tribunal, 199 SCRA 692 (1991) SC also considered the Historical background and as well as the Deliberations. 1935 subject to COA,
THE CONSTITUTIONAL PROVISION ON NATURAL-BORN
“horse trading” 1973 time of Marcos it was diminished.
 Statutory Construction by Atty. Luardo
Possible Pointers for Finals (UC LAW)
Credits to: Nwuybi and Tacio xo
If no ambiguity: Verba legis - Give ordinary meaning to the words
If the language of the statute is plain and free from ambiguity, and Generally, constitutional provisions are self-executing
express a single, definite, and sensible meaning, that meaning is • RULE: constitutional provisions are self executing except when provisions themselves expressly
conclusively presumed to be the meaning which the legislature intended require legislations to implement them.
to convey. • SELF EXECUTING PROVISIONS- provisions which are complete by themselves and becomes operative
CASE: without the aid of supplementary legislation.
Saguisag v. Ochoa, January 12, 2016, G.R. No. 212426 • Just because legislation may supplement and add or prescribe a penalty does not render such
Issue: W/N President may enter into an executive agreement on foreign military bases, troops, or provision ineffective in the absence of such legislation.
facilities • In case of Doubt? Construe such provision as self executing rather than non-self executing.
Yes. Under the principles of constitutional construction, of paramount consideration is the plain Manila Prince Hotel v. GSIS •
meaning of the language expressed in the Constitution, or the verba legis rule. It is presumed that the Issue: w/n the sale at public bidding of the majority ownership of the Manila Hotel a qualified entity
provisions have been carefully crafted in order to express the objective it seeks to attain. It is can match the winning bid of a foreigner •
incumbent upon the Court to refrain from going beyond the plain meaning of the words used in the Held: resolution depends on whether the issue is self executing or not. The court ruled that the
Constitution. It is presumed that the framers and the people meant what they said when they said it, qualified Filipino entity must be given preference by granting it the option to match the winning bid
and that this understanding was reflected in the Constitution and understood by the people in the because the provision is self executing. SC ruled the filipino first is self-executing because it doesnot
way it was meant to be understood when the fundamental law was ordained and promulgated. required legislative.
Even if it is self executing Congress may create and implementing law to clarify
In the case at bar,the phrase being construed is "shall not be allowed in the Philippines" and not the “Or” vs. “And”
preceding one referring to "the expiration in 1991 of the Agreement between the Republic of the “And” means conjunction connecting words or phrases expressing the
Philippines and the United States of America concerning Military Bases, foreign military bases, troops, idea that the latter is to be added or taken along with the first.
or facilities." It is explicit in the wording of the provision itself that any interpretation goes beyond the “Or” is a disjunctive particle used to express as alternative or to give a
text itself and into the discussion of the framers, the context of the Constitutional Commission's time choice of one among two or more things. It is also used to clarify what
of drafting, and the history of the 1947 MBA. Without reference to these factors, a reader would not has already been said, and in such cases, means “in other words,” “to
understand those terms. However, for the phrase "shall not be allowed in the Philippines," there is no wit,” or “that is to say.”
need for such reference. The law is clear. No less than the Senate understood this when it ratified the • And/or (implication) it means both
VFA. It means either
SC says the PH already allowed them by having previous treaties with the US.
Tano v. Socrates, supra
Ordillo v. COMELEC, 192 SCRA 100 (1992)
Exception: where technical terms are employed
Issue:
SC ruled regions two or more constituent provinces. provincies, cities,
Words are used in a broad sense to cover all possible contingencies
Legaspi vs. Minister of Finance
May the President may grant decrees?
Under the 1973 Consti, amendment no. 6 that gave Marcos Legislative Powers in ordinary times it is
not allowed. SC rules that pres. has authority under amendment no. 6 Marcos wanted to lift Martial
law earlier, Congress was impugnant Pres was not exercising military powers he was exercising
legislative.
Ratio being 1973: Martial law may be lifted earlier but we have to give to the president a legitimizing
3
function in case of emergency situations.
 Statutory Construction by Atty. Luardo
Possible Pointers for Finals (UC LAW)
Credits to: Nwuybi and Tacio xo
Statutory
Stare
Cayetano vConstruction
decisis- it is
monsod
(same bythat,
the doctrine
(and/or)
sex Atty.
marriage, Luardo
when
shall) court has once
• Terminology • Aidslaid down a• principle,
in statcon and apply it to all
Dicini (intrinsic Cabiles case
future cases, where facts are substantially the same, regardless of whether the parties and RA 122
Possible Pointers
properties are the same.for Finals (UC LAW) Is it Doctrinal?
Sereno (quo warranto)
Stare Decisis follow past precedents and do not disturb what has been settled. Matters already Binding effect of SC pronouncements on issues not raised by the parties but the court nonetheless
decided on the merits cannot be relitigated again and again. answer in the ratio decidendi.
“Stare decisis et non quieta movere” (follow past precedents and do not disturb what has been
settled.
Case:
Marine mammals
Pines City Educational Center v. NLRC, 227 SCRA 655 (1993)
(retroactive
People v. Macadaeg, 91 Phil 410 (1952)
grp of words
related meaning, Limitations of stare decisis - Where the facts are dissimilar, then the principle of stare decisis does not
Ratio decidendi translates as the reason for the decision. The ratio decidendi of a case is not the actual
(1) ‘guilty’
When the law does not distinguish, apply.
decision, or order, like or ‘the defender is liable to courts should not distinguish
pay compensation’. The ratio
• The rule of stare decisis is not absolute. It does not apply when there is a conflict between the
decidendi establishes a precedent, which is the rule of law used by the judge or judges in deciding the
precedent and the law.
legal
Falcisproblem raised( by the facts of the case. This rule, which is an abstraction from the facts of the
c Civ Reg • The duty of the court is to forsake and abandon any doctrine or rule found to be in violation of law in
case, is known as the ratio decidendi of the case.
same force
Reasonsexandmarriage,
justification given by the court
• Inferior courts as well as the legislature cannot abandon a precedent enunciated by the SC except by
shall)
way of repeal or amendment of the law itself
Obiter Dictum opinion expressed by a court upon some question of law which is not necessary to
CASE:
the decision of the case before it; not binding as a precedent. (Agpalo)
Koppel (Phils.), Inc. v. Yatco, 77 Phil 496 (1946)
Terminology
In a judgment, Aids in statcon
any statement of Dicini
law that(intrinsic
is not anaids)
essential part of the ratio decidendi is, strictly
Appellant's second assignment of error can be summarily disposed of. It is clear that the ruling of the
speaking, superfluous. Those statements are referred to as obiter dictum. This is Latin for ‘a word
Secretary of Finance, Exhibit M, was not binding upon the trial court, much less upon this tribunal,
said while travelling’ or ‘along the way’ (obiter dicta in the plural). Although obiter dicta statements
since the duty and power of interpreting the laws is primarily a function of the judiciary. (Ortua vs.
do not form part of the binding precedent, they can be persuasive authority if taken into
Singson Encarnacion, 59 Phil., 440, 444.) Plaintiff cannot be excused from abiding by this legal principle,
consideration in later cases. That is, if the judge in the later case considers it appropriate to do so
nor can it properly be heard to say that it relied on the Secretary's ruling and that, therefore, the courts
Difference: Doctrinal weight, OD is not binding compared to Ratio Decidendi.
should not now apply an interpretation at variance therewith. The rule of stare decisis is undoubtedly
Sometimes, both has the same weight. Even the court is guilty.
entitled to more respect in the construction of statutes than the interpretations given by officers of the
administrative branches of the government, even those entrusted with the administration of particular
CASE: Delta Motors v. CA, 276 SCRA 212 (1997)
laws. But this court, in Philippine Trust Company and Smith, Bell and Co. vs. Mitchell(59 Phil., 30, 36),
The Court of Appeals likewise did not commit reversible error in deleting the phrase SIHI protested
said:
as obiter dictum.
. . . The rule of stare decisis is entitled to respect. Stability in the law, particularly in the
business field, is desirable. But idolatrous reverence for precedent, simply as precedent, no
An obiter dictum has been defined as an opinion expressed by a court upon some question of law
longer rules. More important than anything else is that court should be right. . . .
which is not necessary to the decision of the case before it. 39 It is a remark made, or opinion
expressed, by a judge, in his decision upon a cause, "by the way," that is, incidentally or collaterally,
Albines Ruling in Consti
and not directly upon the question before him, or upon a point not necessarily involved in the
determination of the cause, or introduced by way of illustration, or analogy or argument. Such are
not binding as precedent.
The assailed phrase was indeed obiter dictum as it touched upon a matter not raised by petitioner
4
expressly in its petition assailing the dismissal of its notice of appeal. It was not a prerequisite in
disposing of the aforementioned issue. The body of the resolution did not contain any discussion on
such matter nor mention any principle of law to support such statement.
 Statutory Construction by Atty. Luardo
Possible Pointers for Finals (UC LAW)
Credits to: Nwuybi and Tacio xo
Period in deciding cases –24months, 12months o The term ‘shall’ - imperative or optional While Article 22 of the Revised Penal Code provides that penal laws shall have a retroactive effect
Marcelino v. Cruz insofar as they favor the person guilty of a felony who is not a habitual criminal, what is being
• Sec 15(1) Art. VIII, 1987 Constitution – the maximum period within which a case or matter shall be construed here is a constitutional provision specifically contained in the Bill of Rights which is
decided or resolved from the date of its submission shall be o 24 months – SC o 12 months – lower obviously not a penal statute.
collegiate courts o 3 months – all other lower courts • Sec 15(1) Art. VIII, 1987 Constitution –
directory SC ruled the 1987 cannot be retroactive, when it happened you don’t have any right to request a n
• Reasons: o Statutory provisions which may be thus departed from with impunity, without affecting appearance of a counsel because when we wrote his waiver of his right to counsel 1987 was still not
the validity of statutory proceedings, are usually those which relate to the mode or time of doing effective.
that which is essential to effect the aim and purpose of the legislature or some incident of the Aids
essential act – thus directory o Liberal construction – departure from strict compliance would result Intrinsic Aids
in less injury to the general public than would its strict application o Courts are not divested of their Language of the constitution itself
jurisdiction for failure to decide a case within the 90-day period o Only for the guidance of the judges Interpret Constitution as whole- consider as well the context of the entire 1987 Consti
manning our courts o Failure to observe said rule constitutes a ground for administrative sanction CASES: Tolentino vs. Secretary, supra (construction of Sec. 24, Art. VI, Constitution)
against the defaulting judge. A certification to this effect is required before judges are allowed to Extrinsic Aids
draw their salaries History or realities at the time of the adoption
Object sought to be accomplished
Does it mean that the court can no longer decide when lapsed over the period ? Proceedings/debates of the Convention may or may not be applied, entitled to weight but not conslusive.
No, “must” was used but the consequence there is administrative liability. CASE:
WILLIAM F. PERALTA v. THE DIRECTOR OF PRISONS Luz Farms vs. Secretary of DAR, 192 SCRA 51 (1990)
FACTS: Whether the term “agriculture” as used in the Constitution embraces raising livestock, poultry and swine
William Peralta was prosecuted for the crime of robbery and was sentenced to life imprisonment Transcript of the deliberations of the Constitutional Commission of 1986 on the meaning of “agriculture”
as defined and penalized by Act No. 65 of the National Assembly of the Republic of the Philippines. clearly shows that it was never the intention of the framers of the Constitution to include livestock and
The petition for habeas corpus is based on the contention that the Court of Special and Exclusive poultry industry in the coverage of the constitutionally-mandated agrarian reform program of the
Criminal Jurisdiction created by Ordinance No. 7 was a political instrumentality of the military Government. Agricultural lands do not include commercial industrial, and residential lands
forces of Japan and which is repugnant to the aims of the Commonwealth of the Philippines for it Held: it is evident in the foregoing discussion that Sec 2 of RA 6657 which includes “private agricultural
does not afford fair trial and impairs the constitutional rights of the accused. lands devoted to commercial livestock, poultry and swine raising” in the definition of “commercial farms”
ISSUE: is INVALID, to the extent of the aforecited agro-industrial activities are made to be covered by the
Whether the creation of court by Ordinance No. 7 is constitutional. agrarian reform program of the State
HELD: Montejo vs. COMELEC, 242 SCRA 415 (1995)
Yes, it is constitutional. There is no room for doubt to the validity of Ordinance No. 7 since the Whether the COMELEC has the power to transfer, by resolution, one or more municipalities from one
criminal jurisdiction established by the invader is drawn entirely from the law martial as defined congressional district to another district within a province, pursuant to Sec 2 of the Ordinance appended
in the usages of nations. It is merely a governmental agency. The sentence rendered, likewise, is to the 1987 Constitution
good and valid since it was within the power and competence of the belligerent occupant to The Court relied on the proceedings of the Constitutional Commission on “minor adjustments” which
promulgate Act No. 65. All judgments of political complexion of the courts during Japanese regime refers only to the instance where a municipality which has been forgotten (ano ba ‘to…kinalimutan ang
ceased to be valid upon reoccupation of the Islands, as such, the sentence which convicted the municipality) is included in the enumeration of the composition of the congressional district and not to the
petitioner of a crime of a political complexion must be considered as having ceased to be valid. transfer of one municipality from one district to another, which has been considered a substantive or major
Laws including the Consti are prospective in nature by the time it takes effect again it cannot be adjustment
applied .

Filoteo vs Sandiganbayan
Doctrine: It is a fundamental principle of constitutional construction that the intent of the 5
framers of the organic law and of the people adopting it should be given effect. Petitioner’s
contention that Article III, Section 12 of the 1987 Constitution should be given retroactive
effect for being favorable to him as an accused, cannot be sustained.
 Statutory Construction by Atty. Luardo
Possible Pointers for Finals (UC LAW)
Credits to: Nwuybi and Tacio xo
Changes in the phraseology HELD:
CASE: Galman vs. Pamaran, 138 SCRA 294 (1985) No. Reading Art. 12, Sec. 1 of the Constitution, it is clear that Sec. 4 protects
Galman was set up. An investigation by AGRAVA Board, fact finding, determining the participation. those appointed into the service that do not fall as any of the following: “policy-
Issue: violation of right of self incrimination determining, primarily confidential or highly technical in nature”. The position of city
engineer is neither of the above-stated. This is confirmed by the enactment of C.A.
SC ruled, examine the phraseoleogy the ight of self incrimination shall only be applicable in criminal No. 177. As a contemporaneous construction, this Act affords an index to the
cases the change of phrase expands the application of the context. Even in legislative proceedings. meaning of Civil Service as conceived by the framers of the Constitution.
Furthermore, the rules of construction inform us that the words used in construction
Galman v. Pamaran • the phrase” no person shall be x x x compelled in a criminal case be a witness are to be given the sense they have in common use. The Court therefore held that
against himself” is changed in such a way the words criminal cases had been deleted simply means Petitioner De los Santos is entitled to remain in office as the City Engineer of Baguio
that it is not limited to criminal cases only. with all the emoluments, rights and privileges appurtenant thereto, until he resigns or
is removed for cause, and that Respondent’s appointment is ineffective in so far as it
Previous laws and judicial decisions may adversely affect those emoluments, rights and privileges
CASE: Perfecto vs. Meer, 85 Phil 567 (1950), dissent of J. Ozaeta
Meer • Art. 8 Sec. 9 1935 Constitution – SC’s interpretation: “shall receive such compensation as may May be applied with the construction of the Congress
be fixed by law, which shall not be diminished during their continuance in office” – exempt from Vera vs. Avelino, 77 Phil 192 (1946)
income tax The Commission on Elections submitted last May 1946 to the President and the Congress a report
• Legislative passed RA 590 Sec. 13 – “no salary whenever received by any public officer of the Republic regarding the national elections held in 1946. It stated that by reason of certain specified acts of
shall be considered exempt from the income tax, payment of which is hereby declared not to be a terrorism and violence in certain provinces, namely Pampanga, Nueva Ecija, Bulacan and Tarlac, the
diminution of his compensation fixed by the Constitution or by law” voting in said region did not reflect the accurate feedback of the local electorate.
• Source of confusion
• Violative of principle on separation of powers During the session on May 25, 1946, a pendatum resolution was approved referring to the report
• RA 590 Sec 13 – unconstitutional,Art 8 Sec. 9 1935 – repealed by Art. 15 Sec. 6 1973 Constitution – ordering that Jose O. Vera, Ramon Diokno and Jose E. Romero – who had been included among the
“no salary or any form of emolument of any public officer or employee, including constitutional 16 candidates for senator receiving the highest number of votes and as proclaimed by the Commissions
officers, shall be exempt from payment of income tax” • Thus, judiciary is not exempt from payment on Elections – shall not be sworn, nor seated, as members of the chamber, pending the termination of
of tax anymore the protest filed against their election.
Consequences of alternative (more than one) constructions it is not conclusive
Marcelino vs. Cruz, supra Petitioners then immediately instituted an action against their colleagues who instituted the
resolution, praying for its annulment and allowing them to occupy their seats and to exercise their
Contemporaneous construction and writings senatorial duties. Respondents assert the validity of the pendatum resolution.
De Los Santos vs. Mallare , 87 Phil 289 (1950) Issues of the Case:
This case questions the legality of the Petitioner’s removal from the same Whether or Not the Commission on Elections has the jurisdiction to determine whether or not votes
office which would be the effect of Respondent’s appointment. Petitioner contends cast in the said provinces are valid.
that under the Constitution, he can not be removed against his will and without Whether or Not the administration of oath and the sitting of Jose O. Vera, Ramon Diokno and Jose
cause, citing Sec. 4, Art. 12 of the Constitution which reads: “No officer or employee Romero should be deferred pending hearing and decision on the protests lodged against their
of the Civil Service shall be removed or suspended except for a cause provided by elections.
law.” Respondent admits that the position of City Engineer “belongs to the
unclassified service”. According to Lacson vs. Romero, all officers or employees in the Held:
unclassified service are protected by the above provision; but notes that there is a The Supreme Court refused to intervene, under the concept of separation of powers, holding that the
difference between this case and the Lacson case. Sec. 2545 of the Revised case was not a “contest”, and affirmed that it is the inherent right of the legislature to determine who
Administration Code authorizes the President to remove at pleasure any of the
6
shall be admitted to its membership. Following the powers assigned by the Constitution, the question
officers enumerated therein, one of who is the city engineer. The two provisions are raised was political in nature and therefore not under the juridical review of the courts
repugnant and absolutel irreconcilable.
ISSUE: W/N the position of City Engineer is an unclassified service.
 Statutory Construction by Atty. Luardo
Possible Pointers for Finals (UC LAW)
Credits to: Nwuybi and Tacio xo
Quo warranto
Justices does not mean that their opinions are better, their decision making in the court is still a
number’s game. The oft-cited origin of quo warranto was the reign of King Edward of England who questioned the local
Opinions are persuasive, the court may or may not. barons and lords who held lands or title under questionable authority. After his return from his crusade
in Palestine, he discovered that England had fallen because of ineffective central administration by his
The use of words “may” and “shall” predecessor, King Henry III.126 The inevitable result was that the barons, whose relations with the King
Use of the word “may” in the statute generally connotes a permissible were governed on paper by Magna Carta, assumed to themselves whatever power the King's officers
thing, and operates to confer discretion while the word “shall” had neglected. Thus, King Edward deemed it wise to inquire as to what right the barons exercised any
isimperative, operating to impose a duty which may be enforced. power that deviated in the slightest from normal type of feudalism that the King had in mind. The
The term “shall” may be either as mandatory or directory depending theory is that certain rights are regalia and can be exercised only upon showing of actual grants from
upon a consideration of the entire provision in which it is found, its the King or his predecessor. Verily, King Edward's purpose was to catalogue the rights, properties and
object and consequences that would follow from construing it one way or possessions of the kingdom in his efforts to restore the same.
the other In the Philippines, the remedies against usurpers of public office appeared in the 1900s, through Act
No. 190.127 Section 197 of the Act provides for provision comparable to Section 1, Rule 66 of the Rules
Republic vs Sereno of Court:
‘may’ be removed from office o ‘may’ in this context may denote an option, hence, alternatives are Sec. 197. Usurpation of an Office or Franchise A civil action may be brought in the name of the
available. Government of the Philippine Islands:

Impeachment is not an exclusive remedy 1. Against person who usurps, intrudes into, or unlawfully holds or exercises public civil
the language of Section 2, Article XI of the Constitution does not foreclose quo office or franchise within the Philippine Islands, or an office in corporation created by
warranto action against impeachable officers. The provision reads:
the authority of the Government of the Philippine Islands;
Section 2. The President, the Vice-President, the Members of the Supreme Court, the
2. Against public civil officer who does or suffers an act which, by the provisions of law,
Members of the Constitutional Commissions, and the Ombudsman may be removed from
office on impeachment for, and conviction of, culpable violation of the Constitution, treason, works forfeiture of his office;
bribery, graft and corruption, other high crimes, or betrayal of public trust. All other public
officers and employees may be removed from office as provided by law, but not by 3. Against an association of persons who act as corporation within the Philippine Islands,
impeachment. (Emphasis ours) without being legally incorporated or without lawful authority so to act.
It is settled rule of legal hermeneutics that if the language under consideration is plain, it
is neither necessary nor permissible to resort to extrinsic aids, like the records of the Based from the foregoing, it appears that impeachment is proceeding exercised by the legislative, as
constitutional convention, for its interpretation.165 representatives of the sovereign, to vindicate the breach of the trust reposed by the people in the hands
of the public officer by determining the public officer's fitness to stay in the office. Meanwhile, an action
The provision uses the permissive term "may" which, in statutory construction, denotes for quo warranto, involves judicial determination of the eligibility or validity of the election or
discretion and cannot be construed as having mandatory effect.166 We have consistently appointment of public official based on predetermined rules.
held that the term "may" is indicative of mere possibility, an opportunity or an option. The
grantee of that opportunity is vested with right or faculty which he has the option to
exercise.167 An option to remove by impeachment admits of an alternative mode of
effecting the removal.

7
 Statutory Construction by Atty. Luardo
Possible Pointers for Finals (UC LAW)
Credits to: Nwuybi and Tacio xo
Where the law does not distinguish Latin Maxims
• Ubi lex non distinguit, nec nos distinguere debemus - where the law does not distinguish, courts Doctrine of casus omissus
should not distinguish. A person, object or thing omitted from an enumeration must be held to have been omitted
intentionally.
• Corollary principle: General words or phrases in a statute should ordinarily be accorded their The maxim operates only if and when the omission has been clearly established, and in such a case
natural and general significance • General term or phrase should not be reduced into parts and one what is omitted in the enumeration may not, by construction, be included therein.
part distinguished from the other to justify its exclusion from operation. Exception: where legislature did not intend to exclude the person, thing or object from the
• Corollary principle: where the law does not make any exception, courts may not except something enumeration. If such legislative intent is clearly indicated, the court may supply the omission if to do so
therefrom, unless there a compelling reason to justify it. will carry out the clear intent of the legislature and will not do violence to its language

• Application: when legislature laid down a rule for one class, no difference to other class. Expressio unius est exclusion alterius
Presumption: that the legislature made no qualification in the general use of a term. The express mention of one person, thing or consequence implies the exclusion of all others. Rule may
Ramirez vs. CA, 248 SCRA 590 (1995) be expressed in a number of ways:
1.) WoN the violation thereof refers to the taping of a communication other than a participant to the Expressum facit cessare tacitum - what is expressed puts an end to that which is implied where a
communication or even to the taping by a participant who did not secure the consent of the party to statute, by its terms, is expressly limited to certain matters, it may not, by interpretation or
the conversations.? construction, be extended to other matters.
a.) NO. Law did not distinguish whether the party sought to be penalized ought to be party other than Exceptio firmat regulam in casibus non exceptis - A thing not being excepted must be regarded as
or different from those involved in the private communication. The intent is to penalize all persons coming within the purview of the general rule
unauthorized to make any such recording, underscored by “any” Expressio unius est exclusion alterius - The expression of one or more things of a class implies the
b.) Anti-Wire Tapping Law - Republic Act No. 4200 “Act to Prohibit & Penalize WireTapping and Other exclusion of all not expressed, even though all would have been implied had none been expressed;
related Violations of Private Communications and Other Purposes” opposite the doctrine of necessary implication
c.) “It shall be unlawful, not being authorized by all the parties to any private communication or spoken Application :
word, to tap any wire or cable, or by using any other device or arrangement…” • Generally used in construction of statutes granting powers, creating rights and remedies, restricting
common rights, imposing rights & forfeitures, as well as statutes strictly construed.
Garvida vs. Sales, 271 SCRA 767 (1997) Acosta v. Flor
1.) WoN petitioner who was over 21 but below 22 was qualified to be an elective SK member? Statute: specifically designates the persons who may bring actions for quo warranto, excludes others
a.) NO. The distinction is apparent: the member may be more than 21 years of age on election day or from bringing such actions.
on the day he registers as member of Katipunan ng Kabataan. But the elective official, must not be Escribano v. Avila
more than 21 years of age on the day of election. Statute: for libel, “preliminary investigations of criminal actions for written defamation xxx shall be
b.) Sec.424 of the LGC provides that a member of the Katipunan ng Kabataan must not be 21 yrs old. conducted by the city fiscal of province or city or by municipal court of city or capital of the province
c.) Sec. 428 as additional requirement provides that elective official of Sangguniang Kabataan must where such actions may be instituted precludes all other municipal courts from conducting such
not be more than 21 yrs. “on the day of election”. preliminary investigations
Peo. v. Lantin
Statutory definition Statute: crimes which cannot be prosecuted de oficio namely adultery, concubinage, seduction, rape
CASE: Victorias Milling vs. Social Security Commission, 114 SCRA 555 (1962) or acts of lasciviousness; crimes such as slander can be prosecuted de oficio.
“compensation” to include all renumerations, except bonuses, allowances & overtime pay GENERAL TERMS FOLLOWING SPECIAL TERMS
a.) Definition was amended: deleted “exceptions” Ejusdem generis is a general rule of statutory construction that where general words
the amendment shows legislative intent that bonuses & overtime pay now included in employee’s follow an enumeration of persons or things, by words of a particular and
renumeration. specific meaning, such general words are not to be construed in their
a. by virtue of express substantial change in phraseology, whatever prior judicial or executive widest extent, but are to be held as applying only to persons or things of
8
construction should give way to mandate of new law. A statutory definition of term containing a the same general kind or class as those specifically mentioned. But this
general rule and an exception thereto is amended by eliminating the exception, the legislative rule must be discarded where the legislative intention is plain to the
intent is clear that the term should now include the exception within the scope of the general rule. contrary.
 Statutory Construction by Atty. Luardo
Possible Pointers for Finals (UC LAW)
Credits to: Nwuybi and Tacio xo
Presumptions The purpose of RA 6426 to exempt such assets from attachment: at the time the said law was enacted,
the country’s economy was in a shambles. but in the present time, the country has recovered
Of Constitutionality/Validity of Statutes economically. No reason why such assets cannot be attached especially if it would satisfy a judgment to
- In the absence of evidence demonstrating the alleged confiscatory effect of the provision in award moral damages to a 12-year-old rape victim.
question, there is no basis for its nullification in view of the presumption of validity which every law
has in its favor. Against Absurdity
- [GR] Statutes are presumed to be valid - Statutes must receive a sensible construction such as will give effect to the legislative intention so
-[EX] If it clearly appears that the statute violates the fundamental law (Constitution) as to avoid an unjust and absurd conclusion.
- Presumptions against undesirable consequences were never intended by a legislative measure.
CASES: CASE: Oliveros vs. Villaluz, 57 SCRA 163 (1974)
NHA vs. Reyes, 123 SCRA 245 (1983) → SUPERSEDED by EPZA v. Dulay, G.R. No. L-59603, April 29, Issue: whether or not the suspension order against an elective official following an information for
198 violation of the AntiGraft law filed against him, applies not only to the current term of office but also to
Tano vs. Socrates, 278 SCRA 154 (1997) another term if the accused run for reelection and won
Sec 13 of the Anti-Graft Law – suspension unless acquitted, reinstated!
Of the Beneficial Operation of Statutes Held: only refers to the current term of the suspended officer (and not to a future unknown and
CASES: uncertain new term unless supplemented by a new suspension order in the event of reelection) for if
CIR vs. S.C. Johnson and Sons, Inc., 309 SCRA 87 (1999) his term shall have expired at the time of acquittal, he would obviously be no longer entitled to
Sesbreno vs. CBAA, 270 SCRA 360 (1997) reinstatement; otherwise it will lead to absurdities
Against Injustice
Of Prospective Application - The law should never be interpreted in such a way as to cause injustice as this never lies within the
CASES: legislative intent.
Republic vs. Sandiganbayan, 269 SCRA 317 (1997) - Judges do not and must not unfeelingly apply the law as it is worded, yielding like robots to the literal
Grego vs. COMELEC, 274 SCRA 481 (1997) command without regard to its cause and consequence.
Grego v. Comelec • A statute despite the generality of its language, must not be so construed as to legislature did not intend to work a hardship or an oppressive result, a possible abuse of authority or
overreach acts, events, or matters which transpired before its passage • Statute: Sec.40 of the LGC act of oppression, arming one person with a weapon to impose hardship on the other
disqualifying those removed from office as a result of an administrative case from running for local - ART 10, CC; “In case of doubt in the interpretation and application of laws, it is presumed that the
elective positions cannot be applied retroactively. • Held: It cannot disqualify a person who was lawmaking body intended right and justice to prevail.”
administratively removed from his position prior to the effectivity of said Code from running for an CASES:
elective position. • Rationale: a law is a rule established to guide actions with no binding effect until Amatan vs. Aujero, 248 SCRA 511 (1995)
it is enacted. • Nova constitution futuris formam imponere debet non praeteretis – A new statute Rodrigo Umpad was charged with homicide
should affect the future, not the past Pursuant to some provision in criminal procedure, he entered into a plea bargaining agreement, which
the judge approved of, downgrading the offense charge of homicide to attempted homicide to which
In favor of right and justice Umpad pleaded guilty thereto.
CASE: Salvacion vs. Central Bank, 278 SCRA 27 (1997) Fiat justicia, ruat coelum – let the right be done, though the heavens fall
Greg Bartelli raped his alleged niece 10 times and detained her in his apartment for 4 days Stated differently, when a provision of the law is silent or ambiguougs, judges ought to invoke a
Court gave a favorable judgment of more than 1MPhp BSP rejected the writ of attachment alleging solution responsive to the vehement urge of conscience
Sec 113 of the Central Bank Circular No. 960 (applicable to transient foreigners)
Issue: whether the dollar bank deposit in a Philippine bank of a foreign tourist can be attached to Against Implied Repeals
satisfy the moral damages awarded in favor of the latter’s 12-year-old rape victim - In the absence of an express repeal, a subsequent law cannot be construed as repealing a prior law
BSP did not honor the writ of attachment pursuant to RA6426 Sec 8 – “foreign currency deposits unless an irreconcilable inconsistency and repugnancy exists in terms of the new and old laws.
shall be exempt from attachment, garnishment, or any other order or process of any court, - REQUISITES:
9
legislative body, government agency or any administrative body whatsoever” a. Statutes must touch the same subject matter; and
Court applied the principles of right and justice to prevail over the strict and literal words of the b. There is irreconcilable inconsistency and repugnancy between the statutes.
statute.
 Statutory Construction by Atty. Luardo
Possible Pointers for Finals (UC LAW)
Credits to: Nwuybi and Tacio xo
This rule is commonly called the “ejusdem generis” rule, because it
teaches us that broad and comprehensive expressions in an act, such as
“and all others”, or “any others”, are usually to be restricted to persons or
things “of the same kind” or class with those specially named in the
preceding words. It is merely a tool of statutory construction resorted
to when legislative intent is uncertain.
Ejusdem Generis (literally: same kind or species; general word or phrase that follow an enumeration of
particular and specific words, which are of the class or kind, are restricted only to things or cases of the same
kind or class as those specifically mentioned)

10