STATUTORY CONSTRUCTION

Introduction

What is statutory construction?

Art or process of discovering and expounding the meaning and intention of the authors of the law with respect to its application to a given case, where that intention is rendered doubtful, among others, by reason of the fact that the given case is not explicitly provided for in the law Caltex Phils, Inc. vs. Palomar (18 SCRA 247)

Construction vs. interpretation

Interpretation is the art of finding the true meaning and sense of any form of words while construction is the process of drawing warranted conclusions not always included in the direct expressions, or determining the application of words to facts in litigation. In practice, they are understood as having the same signification

Rules of Construction

Tools to ascertain legislative intent, not rules of law but axioms of experience Helps the court to ascertain the true intent and meaning of the ambiguous language of the statute Legislature sometimes adopt the rules of statutory construction as part of the provisions of the statute

Where legislative intent is ascertained

The statute itself If the statute as a whole fails to indicate the legislative intent, the court may look beyond the statute, such as legislative history in order to ascertain what was in the legislative mind at the time the statute was enacted, the circumstances when the action was taken, what evil was meant to be redressed.

Statutes (subject of construction)

Include statutes, executive orders, department circulars, ordinances, constitution

Authority of construction and interpretation

Judicial Department
Supreme

Court Lower Courts:

Court

of Appeals Regional Trial Court Municipal Trial Court in Cities Municipal Trial Court Municipal Circuit Trial Court

Judicial Rulings

Rulings of SC part of legal system Judicial Rulings have no retroactive effect Only SC en banc can modify or abandon principle of law, and not any division of the Court Court may issue guidelines in construing statute

Limitations on the power to Construe

May not enlarge or restrict statutes Courts may not be influenced by questions of wisdom or sympathy

Requisites for construction

Actual case or controversy

There is ambiguity in the law involved

Where the law speaks in clear and categorical language, there is no room for interpretation, only for application.

Director of Lands vs. CA

GR No. 102858, July 28, 1997

Facts:
Teodoro Abisado filed petition for original registration to his title over a parcel of land under PD 1529. This was assigned to an RTC in Mindoro. During the pendency of the application, applicant died. Hence, the heirs rep. by Josefa Abistado their Aunt were substituted as applicants. The RTC dismissed the application for want of jurisdiction. Records show that applicants failed to comply with the provisions of Sec. 23 of PD 1529 on publication of the notice of initial hearing in a newspaper of general circulation. This was published only in the Official Gazette.

 CA

reversed the decision of the RTC ruling that publication in the newspaper of general circulation was merely procedural and that failure to do so did not deprive the RTC of authority to grant the application. Hence, this appeal by certiorari. or not the land registration court can validly confirm and register the title of the applicants in the absence of publication in the newspaper of general circulation as required under Sec. 23 of PD 1529

ISSUE:
Whether

Provision of Law in Question:

Section 23. Notice of initial hearing, publication, etc. The court shall, within five days from filing of the application, issue an order setting the date and hour of the initial hearing which shall not be earlier than forty-five days nor later than ninety days from the date of the order. The public shall be given notice of the initial hearing of the application for land registration by means of (1) publication; (2) mailing; and (3) posting. 1. By publication. Upon receipt of the order of the court setting the time for initial hearing, the Commissioner of Land Registration shall cause notice of initial hearing to be published once in the Official Gazette and once in a newspaper of general circulation in the Philippines: Provided, however, that the publication in the Official Gazette shall be sufficient to confer jurisdiction upon the court. Said notice shall be addressed x x xxx

Decision:
The

Supreme Court said No. This is impelled by the demands of statutory construction and the due process rationale behind the publication requirement. The term used is shall which denotes an imperative and thus indicates the mandatory character of a statute. Since there was a failure to comply, with the publication requirement, the application must be dismissed without prejudice to reapplication in the future after the legal requisites have been complied with.

Pascual et.al. vs. Pascual Bautista et.al.

GR No. 84840, March 25, 1992 Facts:
Don Andres Pascual died intestate without any children and was survived by a) Surviving spouse Adela, b) 6 children of his full brother Wenceslao, c) 7 children of full brother Pedro, d) acknowledged and natural children of full blood brother Eligio (petitioners) and e) representative of the intestate of Eleuterio, half blood brother. Petitioners Motion and Motion for Reconsideration manifesting their hereditary rights in the estate of Don Andres was denied by RTC and dismissed by CA. Hence, this petition

Issue:
Whether

or not Article 992 of the Civil Code can be interpreted to exclude recognized natural children from the inheritance of the deceased

Provision of Law involved:

Article

992 of the Civil Code: An illegitimate child has no right to inherit ab intestato from the legitimate children and relatives of his father or mother; nor shall such children or relatives inherit in the same manner from the illegitimate child.(943a)

Petitioners contended that the word illegitimate should not cover acknowledged natural children because their illegitimacy is not due to the subsistence of a prior marriage when such children were conceived. This term should only cover the spurious children

Decision:
Supreme Court held that Article 992 does not exclude recognized natural children from the inheritance of the deceased. Eligio Pascual is a legitimate child but petitioners are his illegitimate children. They cannot represent their father in the succession of the latter to the intestate estate of the decedent Andres Pascual, full blood brother of their father. Although the interpretation desired by petitioner is more humane, the courts may not speculate on the intent of the legislature apart from the words of the law which is clear.

Pp vs. Mario Mapa y Mapulong

GR No. L-22301, August 30, 1967

Facts:
Defendant

Mapa ws charged and convicted of the crime of illegal possession of firearm and ammunition by the CFI Manila. His sole defense is that he is the duly appointed secret agent of the then Governor of Batangas and at the time of the commission of the offense, he had a confidential missin to Manila, Pasay and Quezon Cities.

ISSUE:
Whether

or not the appointment to and holding the position as a secret agent of the governor would constitute a sufficient defense for the prosecution of the crime of illegal possession of firearm and ammunition?

The Law is explicit:

it shall be unlawful for any person to possess any firerm, detached parts of firearms or ammunition firearms and ammunitions regularly and lawfully issued to officers, soldiers, sailors, or marines of the Armed Forces of the Philippines, the Philippine Constabulary, guards in the employment of the Bureau of Prisons, municipal police, provincial governors, lieutenant governors, provincial treasurers, municipal treasurers, municipal mayors, and guards of provincial prisoners and jails are not covered when such firearms are in possession of such officials and public servants for use in the performance of their official duties.

Decision:
Supreme

Court held that this is not a valid defense. The law is clear. No provision is made for a secret agent. As such, he is not exempt. The first and fundamental duty of the courts is to apply the law. Construction and interpretation come only after it has been demonstrated that application is impossible or inadequate without them. Conviction of the accused must stand.

Pp. vs. Patricio Amigo

GR No. 116719, January 18, 1996

Facts
Accused

Patricio Amigo was charged and convicted of murder by the RTC Davao City and sentenced to reclusion perpetua. Accused claims that the penalty is too cruel and harsh and pleads for sympathy

Issue: Is sympathy a factor in imposing penalty? HELD: Courts are not the forum to plead for sympathy. The duty of the courts is to apply disregarding the feeling of sympathy or pity for an accused. DURA LEX SED LEX.

Twin Ace Holdings Corp. vs. Rufina Co.

G.R. No. 16091, June 8, 2006 FACTS:
Twin Ace Holdings is a private domestic corporation engaged in the manufacture of rhum, wines and liquor under the name and style Tanduay Distillers. It has registered its mark of ownership over the bottles with Bureau of Patent, Trademarks and Technology Transfer under R.A. 523. It sells products to the public excluding the bottles, retrieves, washes and reuses them. Rufina is engaged in production, fermentation and manufacture of patis and other food seasonings, buying and selling of all kinds of foods and other merchandize for domestic use or for export. It uses as containers for its patis and food seasonings the containers bottles owned by Twin Ace without authority.

 RTC

issued writ of replevin. Deputy sherrif seized 26T empty bottles marked Tanduay Distellery Inc. at the address of Rufina Rufina claimed that the bottles were purchased from junk shops thus, they are the owners RTC decided in favor of Rufina by dismissing the complaint and awarded damages CA modified the decision by deleting award of damages and Attys fees.

ISSUE

Whether or not Rufina is covered within the exemption provided by Section 6 of RA 623 as amended by RA 5700? Law involved Section 2. It shall be unlawful for any person, without the written consent of the manufacturer, bottler or seller who has successfully registered the marks of ownership in accordance with the provisions of the next preceding section, to fill such bottles, boxes, kegs, barrels, or other similar containers so marked or stamped, for the purpose of sale, or to sell, dispose of, buy, or traffic in, or wantonly destroy the same, whether filled or not, or to use the same for drinking vessels or glasses or for any other purpose than that registered by the manufacturer, bottler or seller. Any violation of this section shall be punished by a fine or not more than one hundred pesos or imprisonment of not more than thirty days or both.

Section 3. The use by any person other than the registered manufacturer, bottler, or seller, without written permission of the latter, of any such bottle, cask, barrel, keg, box or other similar container, or the possession thereof by any junk dealer or dealer in casks, barrels, kegs, boxes, or other similar containers, the same being duly marked or stamped and registered as herein provided, shall be prima facie evidence that such use, or possession is unlawful.
Section 4. The criminal action provided in this Act shall is no way affect any civil action to which the registered manufacturer, bottler, or seller, may be entitled by law or contract. Section 5. No action shall be brought under this Act against any person to whom the registered manufacturer, bottler, or seller, has transferred by way of sale, any of the containers herein referred to, but the sale of the beverage contained in the said containers shall not include the sale of the containers unless specifically so provided. Section 6. The provision of this Act shall not be interpreted as prohibiting the use of bottles as containers for "sisi", "bagoong", "patis", and similar native products.

Decision:
Rufina

is covered under the exemption under Section 6. The exemption contained in Section 6 of RA 623 applies to all manufacturers of sisi, bagoong, patis and similar native products without distinction or qualification as to whether they are small, medium or large scale. The law is clear thus there is no room for interpretation

Types of Construction/Interpretation

Close or literal Extensive or liberal Extravagant (beyond the true one) Free or unrestricted (based on general principles in good faith, not bound by any specific superior principle) Limited or restricted Predestined (strong bias of mind)

Strict and Liberal Prospective and retrospective Literal interpretation