STATCON NOTES

================================= in the law must be given its ordinary

A. Definition of Statutory Construction meaning, and is manifest from the
- The art or process of discovering law itself unless a contrary intent .
and expounding the meaning and [verba legis] (PCFI v. NTC)
intention of the authors of the law
with respect to its application to a =================================
given case, where that intention is C. Distinguish Statutory Construction
rendered doubtful, amongst from Interpretation
others, by reason of the fact that - If the law is CLEAR and
the given case is not explicitly UNAMBIGUOUS, there is NO room
provided for in the law (Caltex Inc. for interpretation or construction.
v. Palomar). There is room for APPLICATION
- Drawing of warranted conclusions [verba legis].
respecting subjects that lie beyond - So alike in practical results and so
the direct expression of the text. are used interchangeably;
- The absence of a statutory definition synonymous
of a term used in a statute will not
render the law void for vagueness, if CONSTRUCTION - process of
the meaning can be determined drawing warranted conclusions not always
through the judicial function of included in direct expressions, or
construction. Elementary is the determining the application of words to facts
principle that words should be in litigation
construed in their ordinary and usual
meaning. (Romualdez v. INTERPRETATION - art of finding
Sandiganbayan) the true meaning and sense of any form of
- This conclusion firms up in the light words (intrinsic aid)
of the mischief sought to be
remedied by the law, resorting to the =================================
determination thereof being D. Judiciary’s Role in Statutory
accepted extrinsic aid in statutory Construction
construction. (Caltex Inc. v. Palomar) - The duty of the court is to settle
actual controversies involving rights
principle of legal hermeneutics that words which are legally demandable and
of a statute will be interpreted in their enforceable and determine whether
natural, plain and ordinary acceptance and or not there has been a grave abuse
signification, unless it is evident that the of discretion amounting to lack or
legislature intended a technical or special excess of jurisdiction on any part or
legal meaning to those words. branch of the government. The
Court should not assume the role of
================================= legislator. (Floresca v. Philex –
B. Nature of the Rules of Statutory dissenting opinion of Justice
Construction Gutierrez)
- The basic canon of statutory - Contrary to the perception of the
interpretation is that the word used dissenting opinion, the Court does
 STATCON NOTES

not legislate in the instant case. The provisions of the retirement law
Court merely applies and gives itself. Guided by the rules of
effect to the constitutional statutory construction in this
guarantees of social justice then consideration, we find that the
secured by Section 5 of Article II and language of the retirement law is
Section 6 of Article XIV of the 1935 clear and unequivocal; room for
Constitution, and now by Sections 6, construction or interpretation exists,
7, and 9 of Article II only the application of the letter of
- Two requisites must concur to the law.
construe or interpret the laws: 2. Also, in the case of Legaspi v.
1. There must be an actual Creative Play, the Court denied the
case or controversy. invocation of liberal application of
2. There is ambiguity in the law the rules of court when the petitioner
involved in the controversy transgressed procedural rules due to
belated filing of a petition.
================================= 3. Lastly, in the case of People v.
E. Strict vs. Liberal Construction Veneracion, the Court denied the
Strict Construction - is that construction liberal interpretation of criminal law
according to the letter of a statute, which because it is clear under the law,
recognizes nothing that is not expressed, that the penalty imposable for the
takes the language used in its exact crime of Rape with Homicide is not
meaning, and admits no equitable Reclusion Perpetua but Death.
consideration.
Liberal Construction - means such The provision leaves no room for the
equitable construction as will enlarge the exercise of discretion on the part of the trial
letter of a statute to accomplish its intended judge to impose a penalty under the
purpose, carry out its intent, or promote circumstances described, other than a
justice. sentence of death. Hence, the petition was
granted and the Court remanded the case
Liberal to the trial court for proper imposition of the
Rule: If the law is clear and unambiguous penalty.
there is no need for liberal construction
- In the absence of any basis for =================================
liberal interpretation, the Court would F. Judicial Legislation
be engaged in judicial legislation. - Courts cannot limit the application or
coverage of a law, nor can it impose
1. In the case of Fetalino v. COMELEC, conditions not provided therein.
the Court denied the petitioners’
appeal to liberal construction of - The Court should give Congress a
Section 1 of R.A. No. 1568 is chance to perform its primordial duty
misplaced since the law is clear and of lawmaking. The Court should not
unambiguous. We emphasize that pre-empt Congress and usurp its
the primary modality of addressing inherent powers of making and
the present case is to look into the enacting laws. While it may be the
 STATCON NOTES

most expeditious approach, a short the statutory authority granted by the

cut by judicial fiat is a dangerous legislature to the objects and
proposition, lest the Court dare purposes of the law, and should not
trespass on prohibited judicial be in contradiction to, but in
legislation. (Corpuz v. People) conformity with, the standards
prescribed by law.
- In the case of Floresca v. Philex To be valid, an administrative rule or
Mining,the Court ruled that there is regulation must conform, not
no judicial legislation it only applied contradict, the provisions of the
and gave effect to the because enabling law. An implementing rule
constitutional guarantees of social or regulation cannot modify, expand,
justice then secured by Section 5 of or subtract from the law it is intended
Article 11 and Section 6 of Article to implement. Any rule that is not
XIV of the 1935 Constitution when it consistent with the statute itself is
ruled that awarding compensation null and void. While administrative
under the Workmen's Compensation agencies, such as the Bureau of
Act differs from that in giving Internal Revenue, may issue
damages under the Civil Code regulations to implement statutes,
they are without authority to limit the
Article 10 of the New Civil Code scope of the statute to less than
states: "In case of doubt in the what it provides, or extend or
interpretation or application of laws, expand the statute beyond its terms,
it is presumed that the law making or in any way modify explicit
body intended right and justice to provisions of the law. Indeed, a
prevail. quasi-judicial body or an
administrative agency for that matter
- Also, it was held in the case of Fort cannot amend an act of Congress.
Bonifacio Development Corporation Hence, in case of a discrepancy
v. CIR, that as mandated by Article 7 between the basic law and an
of the Civil Code, an administrative interpretative or administrative
rule or regulation cannot contravene ruling, the basic law prevails.
the law on which it is based. RR
7-95 is inconsistent with Section 105 =================================
insofar as the definition of the term G. Fundamental Rule in the Construction
"goods" is concerned. This is a of Statutes
legislative act beyond the authority - Basic is the rule in statutory
of the CIR and the Secretary of construction that when the law is
Finance. The rules and regulations clear and unambiguous, the court
that administrative agencies has no alternative but to apply the
promulgate, which are the product of same according to its clear language
a delegated legislative power to - When the statutory norm speaks
create new and additional legal unequivocally, there is nothing for
provisions that have the effect of the courts to do except to apply it
law, should be within the scope of
 STATCON NOTES

Three Cardinal Rules: interpreted. In other words, only statutes

1. VERBA LEGIS (VL) with ambiguous or doubtful meaning may be
It means that whenever possible, the the subject of statutory construction and
words used in the statute must be interpretation.
given their ordinary meaning except
where technical terms are employed Paras vs. COMELEC
2. RATIO LEGIS EST ANIMA (RLEA) Principles: It is a rule in the statutory
It means that in case of ambiguity, the construction that every part of the statute
words of the statute should be interpreted in must be interpreted with reference to the
accordancewith the intent of the framers. context. That is that every part of the statute
3. UT MAGIS VALEAT QUAM PEREAT must be considered together with the
(UMVQP) other parts, and kept subservient to
It means that the statute should be the general intent of the
interpreted as a whole, but if the plain [Link] the interpretation of
meaning of the word isnot found to be clear, a statute, the Court should start with
resort to other aid if available. the assumption that the legislature
intended to enact effective law
================================= - When statutes with an ambiguous or
H. When Does Statutory Construction doubtful meaning
Come In? - When the law is not clear and
ambiguous
National Federation of Labor vs. Eisma - where the statutory norm speaks
Principle: The first and fundamental duty unequivocally, there is nothing for
of courts is to apply the law. Construction the courts to do except to apply it
and interpretation come only after it has -
been demonstrated that the application is =================================
impossible or inadequate without them. E. What is the Rule on Executive
Construction?
Paat vs. Court of Appeals Rule:
Principle: When the statute is clear and PAFLU vs. Bureau of Labor Relations
explicit, there is no room for construction Principle: The principle that the
and [Link] a party is allowed contemporaneous construction of a statute
to seek the intervention of the Court, it is a by the executive officers of the government
precondition that one should have availed of whose duty is to execute it, is
all the means of administrative remedies. entitled to great respect, and should
ordinarily control the construction of the
People vs. Mapa statute by the [Link] will and should
Principle: When the law is explicit and respect the contemporaneous construction
clear, there is no room for interpretation and places upon a statute by the executive
construction. officers whose duty is to enforce it,
unless such interpretation is clearly
Daoang vs. Municipal Judge of San Nicolas erroneous
Principle: When the statute is clear and
unambiguous on its face, need not be
 STATCON NOTES

WHEN EXECUTIVE CONSTRUCTION IS produce a harmonious whole. A statute

NOT GIVEN WEIGHT must be construed so as to harmonize and
Philippine Apparel Workers’ Union vs. effect all its provisions wherever possible.
NLRC Every part of the statute must be interpreted
Principle: The construction and explanation with reference to the context. This means
of the Undersecretary is not only wrong as it that every part of the statute must be
was purely based on a misapprehension of considered together with the other
facts, but also unlawful as it goes beyond parts and kept subservient to the general
the scope of [Link] Department of Labor intent of the whole enactment, not
has the right to construe. The rule is that separately and independently.
great weight shall begiven to the Noscitur a sociis – provides that where
construction given a statute by the a particular word or phrase in a
government agency called upon to statement is ambiguous in itself or is
implement the statute; in this case, the equally susceptible of various meanings, its
weight in favor of the Department of Labor true meaning may be made clear and
should be greater because the Department specific by considering the company in
is not interpreting or construing a statute, which it is found or with which it is
but it has explained the extent of its own associated
rule.
China Bank vs. Ortega
IBAA Employees’ Union vs. Inciong Principle: The Court relied on the
Principle: Although administrative discussion of the conference committee
interpretation of statutes are generally given report of the Congress to interpret the RA
weight, they should not be applied if such 1405 (Bank Secrecy Act) that the
interpretation is in effect amending or prohibition against examination of inquiry
enlarging the scope of exclusion found in into a bank deposit does not preclude from
the law itself. garnishment for the satisfaction of
judgment. (Legislative History of the
================================= Statute)
J. How to Ascertain Legislative Intent
legislative intent is to be determined from Board of Administrators of the PVA vs.
the language employed, and where there is Bautista
no ambiguity in the words, there is no room Principle: A veteran pension law is a
for construction. governmental expression of gratitude and
recognition of those who rendered service
Aisporna vs. CA for the country, especially during times
Principle: Legislative intent must be of war and revolution, by extending to
ascertained from a consideration of the them regular monetary [Link] is a general
statute as a whole. Particular words, rule that a liberal construction is given to
clauses and phrases should not be pension statutes in favor of those entitled to
studied as detached and isolated pensions.
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 K. Subjects of Construction
 STATCON NOTES

● Constitution framers of the organic law and of the

● Statutes people adopting it, the intention to
● Ordinances which force is to begiven is that
● Presidential Decrees which is embodied and expressed in
the constitutional provisions
1. CONSTITUTION themselves.
- Statute construed in harmony with
the Constitution
- the fundamental law to which all Perfecto vs. Meer
laws are subservient/subordinate Principle: The SC held that unless
and until the legislature approved an
● General Rule: Do not interpret a amendment to the Income TaxLaw
statute independent from the expressly taxing the salaries of the
constitution Construe the statute in judges, salaries of judges are not
harmony with the fundamental law: included in the word “income” taxed
● It is always presumed that the by the income tax law, to the effect
legislature adhered to the that the collection of income taxon
constitutional limitations when they the salary of judicial officer is a
enacted the statute diminution thereof and so violates
● It is also important to understand a the Constitution.
statute in light of the constitution and
to avoid interpreting the former in Endencia vs. David
conflict with the latter Principle: The SC declared RA 590
● What if the statute is susceptible as unconstitutional. It construed that
to two constructions, one is the law is clear in its provision that
constitutional and the other is compensation of judicial officers
unconstitutional? shall not be diminished in their
○ A: The construction that continuance of their office and the
should be adopted should be imposition of the taxes on their
the one that is constitutional salaries is a clear diminution thereof.
and the one that will render it It held that when a statute
invalid should be rejected. transgresses the authority vested in
○ The Court should favor the the legislature, it is the duty of the
construction that gives a court to declare it [Link]
statute of surviving the test of further explained that the action of
constitutionality the legislative body as stated by the
● The Court cannot in order to bring a Solicitor General is a violation of
statute within the fundamental law, separation of powers among
amend it by construction branches of the government. The
enactment of the statute because
Sarmiento vs. Mison the legislative is not in favor of SC’s
Principle: The fundamental principle decision shows that the former also
of constitutional construction is to interpreted the Act. It was ruled by
give effect to the intent of the the Court that it is only the SC that
 STATCON NOTES

has the power to interpret the law 1. Public - affects the public at large or
and Congress shall not interfere as the whole community
the latter’s function is to enact the a. General – applies to the
law. whole state and operates
throughout the state alike
Nitafan vs. Commissioner on upon all people or all of a
Internal Revenue class.
Principle: It is the fundamental b. Special – relates to particular
principle of constitutional person or things of a class or
construction that the intent of the to a particular community,
framers of the organic law and of the individual or thing.
people adopting it, should be given c. Local Law – operation is
effect. The primary task confined to a specific place
unconstitutional construction is or locality (e.g municipal
to ascertain and thereafter ordinance)
assure the realization of the 2. Private - applies only to a specific
purpose of the framers and of the person or subject.
people in the adoption of the
Constitution. d. Kinds as to Application (importance:
what effect should be given to the mandate
of a statute)
2. STATUTES 1. Mandatory
– commands either positively that
- A statute is an act of the legislature something be done in a particular
as an organized body, expressed in way, or negatively that something be
the form, and passed according to not done; it requires OBEDIENCE,
the procedure, required to constitute otherwise void.
it as part of the law of the land. – command words: Shall or Shall
not; Must or Must not; Ought or
a. Definition Ought not; Should or Should not;
- An act of legislature (Philippine Can or Cannot
Commission, Phil. Legislature, 2. Directory
Batasang Pambansa, Congress) • – permissive or discretionary in
- PD’s of Marcos during the period of nature and merely outlines the act to
martial law 1973 Constitution be done in such a way that no injury
- EO of Aquino revolutionary period can result from ignoring it or that its
Freedom Constitution purpose can be accomplished in a
- manner other than that prescribed
b & c. Kinds as to Scope (General, and substantially the same result
Special, Local which are under Public Law) obtained; confer direction upon a
& Kinds as to Interested Parties (Public person; non-performance of what it
and Private) prescribes will not vitiate the
(This depends on substance, rather than proceedings therein taken.
form)
 STATCON NOTES

– permissive words o May or May judicial or administrative

not proceedings, acts of public officers,
Article 5 of the New Civil Code or private deeds and contracts which
otherwise would not produce their
Article 5. Acts executed against the intended consequences by reason of
provisions of mandatory or prohibitory some statutory disability or failure to
laws shall be void, except when the comply with some technical
law itself authorizes their validity. (4a) requirement.
–By their very nature,
e. Kinds as to Performance and curative statutes are retroactive.
Effectivity
1. Permanent - one whose operation is g. Parts of a Statute
not limited in duration but continues a. Title
until repealed. The subject of the statute must be
2. Temporary - duration is for a limited expressed in the title of the bill,
period of time fixed in the statute which breathes the spirit of
itself or whose life ceases upon the command because "the Constitution
happening of an event. (E.g. statute does not exact on Congress the
answering to an emergency) obligation to read during its
deliberations the entire text of the
f. Kinds as to Purpose and Nature bill." Reliance, therefore, may be
1. Penal – are those which define placed on the title of a bill, which,
criminal offenses and specify while not an enacting part, no doubt
corresponding fines and is in some sort a part of the act,
punishments. It is enacted to although only a formal part. (City of
preserve the public order, which Baguio vs. …)
defines an offense against the public
and inflicts a penalty for its violation. b. Preamble
- They are not to be strained - Preamble can enlarge or confer
by construction to spell out a new powers or cure inherent defects in
offense, enlarge the field of crime or the statute (People vs. Purisima).
multiply felonies. - It is also necessary to inquire into
- Whatever is not plainly the intent and spirit of the decree
within the provisions of a penal and this can be found among others
statute should be regarded as in the preamble or "whereas"
without its intendment. (Centeno us. clauses which enumerate the facts
Villalon- Pernillos, infra). or events which justify the
2. Remedial – are those which refer to promulgation of the decree and the
the method of enforcing rights or of stiff sanctions stated therein (People
obtaining redress of their invasion. It vs. Purisima).
can be made to applicable to cases
pending at the time of its enactment c. Body
3. Curative – are those cure errors and Legislative intent must be
irregularities, thereby validating ascertained from a consideration of
 STATCON NOTES

the statute as a whole and not of an Primicias vs. Municipality of

isolated part or a particular provision Urdaneta).
alone. This is a cardinal rule of ● whenever there is a conflict between
statutory construction. Taken in the an ordinance and a statute, the
abstract, a word or phrase might ordinance "must give way."
easily convey a meaning quite (Bagatsing vs. Ramirez).
different from the one actually
intended and evident when the word 4. PRESIDENTIAL DECREES
or phrase is considered with those
with which it is associated. (Aboitiz =================================
vs. Cebu)
Substantive Law
Requirement on Publication ❖ Substantive law is a type of law that
● All statutes, including those of local defines people’s rights and
application and private laws, shall be responsibilities as they are owed to
published as a condition for their each other and to the state.
effectivity, which shall begin fifteen ❖ As a general rule, laws shall have
days after publication unless a only a prospective effect and must
different effectivity date is fixed by not be applied retroactively in
the legislature. Covered by this rule ❖ Substantive law cannot be repealed
are presidential decrees and by a procedural law.
executive orders (Tanada vs.
Tuvera). Procedural Law
● It shall be done immediately upon ❖ Procedural law refers to the rules
their approval, or as soon thereafter governing the legal process. It
as possible, be published in full in outlines how cases move through
the Official Gazette or in a the legal system, from the initial filing
newspaper of general circulation in of a complaint to the final resolution.
the country, to become effective only Procedural law covers various legal
after fifteen days from their areas, including civil, criminal, and
publication, or on another date administrative procedures.
specified by the legislature, in ❖ While the general rule is that rules of
accordance with Article 2 of the Civil procedure may be modified at any
Code (Tanada vs. Tuvera). time to become effective
immediately, as long as the change
3. ORDINANCES does not affect vested rights, there
● An essential requisite for a valid are no vested rights in rules of
ordinance is, among others, that it procedure. The retroactive
"must not contravene... the application of procedural laws does
statute," for it is a "fundamental not violate any rights of litigants.
principle that municipal ordinances
are inferior in status and subordinate Constitution
to the laws of the state." (Juan ❖ All provisions of the Constitution are
self-executing, with exception.
 STATCON NOTES

❖ Prohibitory provisions given literal ❖ Special law prevails over a general

and strict interpretation. law regardless of their dates and
❖ Constitutional provision on natural passage, and the special law is to be
born citizens of the Philippines given considered as a remaining and
retroactive effect. remaining exception to the general
❖ It must be construed in its entirety as law.
one, single document. ❖ A special law must be intended to
❖ Liberal construction of one title, one constitute an exception to the
subject rule. general law, in the absence of the
special circumstances forcing a
Presumption of constitutionality contrary conclusion.
● Every statute is presumed valid ❖ The rule is that a special and local
● To declare a law unconstitutional, statute applicable to a particular
the repugnancy of the law to the case is not repealed by a later
constitution must be clear and statute which is general in its terms,
unequivocal provisions and application even if
● All reasonable doubts should be the terms of the general act are
resolved in favor of the broad enough to include the cases in
constitutionality of law; to doubt is to the special law unless there is
sustain manifest intent to repeal or alter the
● Final arbiter of unconstitutionality of special law.
law is the Supreme Court EN BANC ❖ A general law cannot repeal a
(majority who took part and voted special law.
thereon) ❖ In case of conflict between a general
● Nonetheless, trial courts have provision of a law and a particular
jurisdiction to initially decide the provision of a general law, the latter
issue of constitutionality of a law in should prevail.
appropriate cases ❖ In case of conflict between a general
provision of a special law and a
Statute particular provision of a general law,
❖ In case of conflict between the the latter should prevail.
previous article and latter article, the ❖ Enactment of a later legislation
latter will prevail. which is a general law cannot be
❖ In case of irreconcilable conflict construed to have repealed a special
between two laws, the later law.
enactment must prevail, being the ❖ An administrative circular cannot
more recent expression of legislative supersede, abrogate, modify or
will. nullify a statute. Statutes are
❖ Whenever two statutes of different superior to an Administrative
dates and of contrary tenor are of circular.
equal theoretical application to a ❖ Where a special statute refers to a
particular case. The statute of the subject in general, which the general
later date must prevail being a later statute treats in particular, the
expression of legislative will.
 STATCON NOTES

provision of the latter, in case of in favor of the taxing authority and

conflict, will prevail. strictly against exemption from tax
liability (the result being that
statutory provisions for the refund of
HIERARCHY OF LAWS: taxes are strictly construed in favor
1. Constitution - “policy” of the State and against the taxpayer
2. Statutes - “enabling laws”; to (La Carlota Sugar Central vs.
execute the politics Jimenez).
3. Jurisprudence ● Procedure in auction sales of
4. Executive Orders property for tax delinquency being in
5. Others derogation of property rights should
be followed punctiliously (Serfino vs.
Interpretation of Statutes Court of Tax Appeals).
Penal statute ● Strict adherence to the statutes
● General Rule: Prospective governing tax sales is imperative not
● Exception: Retroactive if favorable only for the protection of the
to the accused taxpayers, but also to allay any
● Exception to the Exception: possible suspicion of collusion
Habitual delinquent and/ or between the buyer and the public
expressly stated in the law itself that officials called upon to enforce such
it cannot be applied retroactively laws (Serfino vs. Court of Tax
● Penal statutes should be strictly Appeals).
construed against the state and
liberally in favor of the accused. Labor Statute:
● The principle is that acts in and of ● General Rule: All doubts in the
themselves innocent and lawful implementation and interpretation of
cannot be held to be criminal unless the labor Code, including its
there is a clear and unequivocal ● implementing rules and regulations
expression of the legislative intent to shall be resolved in favor of labor
make them such. (Villavert vs. Employees
Compensation Commission).
Tax Statute - Mandatory in nature ● "The is the spirit and intention of the
● General Rule: not to extend Labor Code that the Commission
statute’s provisions beyond the clear and its members and the Labor
import of the language used (Manila Arbiters shall use every and all
Railroad Company vs. Collector of reasonable means to ascertain the
Customs). facts in each case speedily and
In case of doubt, such tax statutes objectively and without regard to
are construed most strongly against technicalities of law or procedure, all
the Government and in favor of the in the interest of due process (Del
citizen (Manila Railroad Company Rosario & Sons Logging Enterprises
vs. Collector of Customs). vs. NLRC).
● Rule in tax exemption: exempting ● In case of doubt, the same should
provision is to be construed liberally be resolved in favor of the worker,
 STATCON NOTES

and that social legislations should be

liberally construed to attain their
objective (Manahan vs. ECC).
 STATCON NOTES

of the Philippines without

FINALS specifying constitutional
principles.
Interpretation of Statutes
○ 2. He did not register his wife
and child with the Bureau of
Naturalization Law
Immigration, which is
● GEN RULE: Strictly construed
required under the Alien
against the applicant and in favor
Registration Act.
of the government.
○ 3. He did not file his income
● REASON: The reason is that the
tax return despite having a
right of an alien to become a citizen
fixed salary and profits from
by naturalization is a statutory rather
his business, indicating a
than a natural right, and it does not
lack of proper conduct in
become vested until he files a
relation to the government.
petition and establishes by
● Pe vs Republic: In naturalization
competent and satisfactory evidence
cases, the burden is on the applicant
that he has all the qualifications and
to prove by competent and
none of the disqualifications
satisfactory evidence that he has all
specified by law. In case of doubt,
the qualifications and none of the
the doubt is resolved against the
disqualifications specified by law.
applicant, and his petition for
● Petitioner Pe possessed the
naturalization is denied.
disqualifications in failure of
● Commonwealth Act No. 473–
"conducted himself in a proper and
Revised Naturalization-Law.
irreproachable manner" and “must
● Co vs Republic: Naturalization laws
own real estate in the Philippines
should be rigidly enforced and
worth not less than 5k pesos, or
strictly construed in favor of the
must have some known lucrative
government and against the
trade, profession, or lawful
applicant.
occupation” by:
● Petitioner Co possessed the
○ petitioner owned and
disqualifications in failure of
operated a public utility
“believes in the principles underlying
vehicle, which is a violation
the Philippine Constitution” and
of the Public Service Act
“conducted himself in a proper and
○ “his petition for naturalization
irreproachable manner during the
was instituted on May 26,
entire period of his residence in the
1958, the same year that his
Philippines in his relation with the
income suddenly increased”
constituted government as well as
● Velasco vs. Republic:
with the community in which he is
● Petitioner Richard Velasco
living” by:
possessed the disqualifications in
○ 1. He failed to demonstrate
failure of “having a lucrative income”
belief in the underlying
by:
principles of the Philippine
○ Velasco's employment at the
Constitution, merely stating
drugstore, with a salary of
that he believes in the laws
 STATCON NOTES

P150.00 per month, was which might be less probable if he

neither lucrative nor were to serve a prison sentence.”
substantial with the low ● QUESTION: May persons who apply
purchasing power of our for the benefits of the Probation Law
peso and was suspicious due withdraw their application during the
to his mother's partial period for filing an appeal?
ownership of the store and ○ GEN RULE: No. He
that he’s employed for only certainly could not have
barely a month. both appeal and probation.
○ His character witnesses were [Francisco v. Court of
the same for the Appeals]
naturalization of his brother, ○ Because probation must not
indicating that petitioner has be applied as an “escape
a limited circle of Filipino hatch” if their appeal fails.
friends. ● Yusi vs Morales: Application for
● The naturalization law should be probation is an admission of guilt on
strictly construed, and doubts the part of an accused for the crime
resolved, against the applicant. which led to the judgment of
conviction and that the application
Probation Law for probation is considered a
● GEN RULE: Liberally construed in waiver upon his part to file an
favor/towards the accused. appeal, it is in the best interests of
● REASON: Probation laws are justice that the court should take the
liberally construed to give first-hand necessary steps to insure that the
offenders a second chance to accused has been [fully informed on
maintain his place in society through the full meaning] of his application
the process of reformation before the court acts on it.
○ Reformation– (correction or ● HOWEVER, this waiver is not
change of an existing irrevocable/ final. Petitioners
document by court order as should be allowed to withdraw their
legal contract remedy). application for probation and pursue
● REASON: A statute granting powers their right to appeal therefrom
to an agency created by the because their counsel de officio did
Constitution should be liberally not fully inform them of the import
construed for the advancement of behind filing an application for
the purposes and objectives for probation. The right appeal should
which it was created. Presidential not be irrevocably lost from the
Decree No. 968 (aka Adult moment a convicted accused files
Probation Law of 1976) which an application for probation. Appeal
established the Probation System and probation spring from the same
was envisioned among other things, policy considerations of justice,
"to provide an opportunity for the humanity, and compassion. [Yusi vs
reformation of a penitent of offender Morales]
 STATCON NOTES

● WHO CAN APPLY FOR probable if he were to serve

PROBATION: a prison sentence; and
○ Maximum probationable ○ (c) prevent the commission
imprisonment under the of offenses [Colinares vs.
law was only up to six People]
years.
○ So a maximum sentence of 6 Rules of Court (ROC)
yrs and 1 day does not allow ● GEN RULE: ROC, being
probation. procedural, to be construed
● Colinares vs. People: Ordinarily, liberally.
Arnel would no longer be entitled to ● EXC:
apply for probation, he having ○ However, where a decision of
appealed from the judgment of the a court is satisfactorily
RTC convicting him for frustrated supported by the records and
homicide (max: 6 years and 1 day). is in strict accordance with
● BUT, the Court finds Arnel guilty only the rules, a liberal
of the lesser crime of attempted construction of such rules so
homicide and holds that the as to justify setting aside the
maximum of the penalty imposed on decision is not warranted.
him should be lowered to ● REASON:
imprisonment of 4 months of arresto ○ Its purpose is the proper and
mayor, as minimum, to 2 years and just determination of a
4 months of prision correccional, as litigation.
maximum. With this new penalty, it ○ Procedural laws are no other
would be fair to allow him the right to than technicalities, they are
apply for probation upon remand of adopted not as ends in
the case to the RTC. themselves but as means
● The Probation Law never intended conducive to the realization
to deny an accused his right to of the administration of law
probation through no fault of his. The and justice.
underlying philosophy of probation is ○ ROC should NOT be
one of liberality towards the interpreted to sacrifice
accused. substantial rights at the
● In this jurisdiction, the wisdom expense of technicalities.
behind the enactment of our own ● APPLICATION OF LIBERAL
Probation Law, as outlined in the CONSTRUCTION IN THE
said law, reads: FOLLOWING CASES:
○ (a) promote the correction ○ (1) where a rigid application
and rehabilitation of an will result in a manifest failure
offender by providing him or miscarriage of justice;
with individualized treatment; ○ (2) where the interest of
○ (b) provide an opportunity for substantial justice will be
the reformation of a penitent served
offender which might be less
 STATCON NOTES

○ (3) where the resolution of Pasay City, instead of the CA, and
the emotion is addressed they invoke that the Pasay City
solely to the sound and Court should have followed Rule 50,
judicious discretion of the Section 3 “shall not dismiss the
court; and appeal, but shall certify the case to
○ (4) where the injustice to the the proper court, with a specific and
adverse party is not clear statement of the grounds
commensurate with the therefor."
degree of his ● Also as the CFI had already
thoughtlessness in not dismissed their appeal without
complying with the notifying them and was ready to
prescribed procedure. execute the judgment against them,
● Imperial Insurance vs. Rosete: the petitioners filed in the CA, but
The Rules of Court shall be liberally again they mistakenly not named the
construed in order to promote their “CFI” a the proper respondent party
object and to assist the parties in to the case, making it procedurally
obtaining just, speedy, and improper to provide relief.
inexpensive determination of every ● The Supreme Court ruled that the
action and proceeding. (Bello vs. CFI acted incorrectly by dismissing
CA) the petitioners' appeal instead of
● Respondent judge, Rosete, refused certifying it to the CA.
to honor the special power of ● The Supreme Court underscored the
attorney, stating that only the Board importance of the petitioners' right to
of Directors could authorize the appeal, stating that procedural
regional manager's appearance, technicalities should not deprive
despite the private respondent's them of this substantial right.
counsel expressing willingness to
allow the petitioner time to produce Expropriation Laws
the appropriate authority. ● GEN RULE: Statutes
● The SC ruled that courts must expropriating or authorizing the
prioritize substantial justice over expropriation of property are
strict adherence to technical strictly construed against the
requirements, particularly when a expropriating authority and
party has filed a valid defense and is liberally in favor of property
willing to comply with procedural owners.
requirements. ● REASON: There is a derogation of
● It is the duty of the court, in private rights, thus strict construction
construing the Rules of Court, to is applied. Expropriation plus just
construe the rules liberally to avoid compensation.
injustice, discrimination and ● Power of eminent domain is
unfairness. essentially legislative in nature.
● Bello vs. CA: The petitioners ○ eminent domain– the right
mistakenly filed an appeal to the of a government or its agent
Court of First Instance (CFI) of to take/expropriate private
 STATCON NOTES

property for public use, with property for public

just compensation. use.
○ It may be delegated to the ■ Act No. 190: This act
President, LGUs, or public details the
utility company. procedures for
○ Article 349 of the Civil Code exercising the right of
provides that: "No one may be eminent domain like
deprived of his property unless its requirements
it be by competent authority,
for some purpose of proven ○ (b) also that the right or
public utility, and after payment authority is being exercised
of the proper compensation in accordance with the law.
Unless this requisite (proven ■ Private property
public utility and payment) has ■ For public use
been complied with, it shall be
■ With payment/ just
the duty of the courts to
compensation
protect the owner of such
■ Reasonable
property…”
necessity
● City of Manila vs. Chinese
● The Court highlighted that the
Community of Manila: The rule in
municipality of Manila did not satisfy
exercise of the right of eminent
“Private property” and
domain, whether directly by the
“Reasonable necessity”. First, the
State, or by its authorized agents is
property in question must be private,
that the authority must be strictly
Chinese Cemetery is a public
construed.
cemetery and cannot be
● When that right or authority is
expropriated for the extension of
exercised for the purpose of
Rizal Avenue. Second, no proof of
depriving citizens of their property,
the necessity as the record shows
the courts are authorized to
that adjoining and adjacent lands
interfere, ensuring that property
have been offered to the city free of
owners are not left defenseless .
charge. It was unnecessary because
● The right of expropriation is not an
alternative routes could be utilized
inherent power, so before it can
without disturbing the cemetery.
exercise the right there are 2
requisites and sub-requisites:
=================================
○ (a) that a law or authority
exists for the exercise of the
right of eminent domain LATIN MAXIMS
■ Ex. Act No. 2711:
This act provides the
authority for municipal Q: Why are Latin Rules important?
corporations, like the A: PH laws are nearly Latin, established
City of Manila, to by scholars and recognized by every
condemn private system in the world. Latin was the
primary legal language in European
 STATCON NOTES

civilization which was applied across the "strained relations" hindering

boundaries of local law. her reinstatement.
● Victoria vs. COMELEC: Thus, what
================================= is not clearly provided in the law
a. Verba legis non est recedendum cannot be extended to those matters
● aka plain meaning rule outside its scope (Agpalo).
● from the words of a statute there ○ The formula being proposed
should be no departure is not in favor of the law
● Strictly letter of the law. because the district with a
● Globe Mackay vs. NLRC: If a lower no. of voters has no
statute is clear, plain and free from chance to win. This formula
ambiguity, it must be given its literal shall result that the district
meaning and applied without with the highest number of
attempted interpretation voters would be the source
(interpretation is not where the vice governor
necessary).Verba legis applied. would come from. So
○ Legislature is presumed to COMELEC’s legal formula
know the meaning of the from Sec. 44 of LGC is the
words, to have used words one to be used. When the
advisedly, and to have law is clear, from the words
expressed its intent by the of the law there shall be no
use of such words as are departure. Otherwise, it
found in the STATUTE. would go against the
○ This plain-meaning rule or intention of the law. Verba
verba legis derived from the legis applied. (Justice
maxim index animi sermo est Discussion)
(speech is the index of ○ The SC emphasized that the
intention) rests on the valid ranking must be determined
presumption that the words based on the proportion of
employed by the legislature votes obtained by each
in a statute correctly express winning candidate to the total
its intent or will and number of registered voters
preclude/prohibit the court in each district, as explicitly
from construing it differently. stated in the law.
○ The SC applied the clear ● Garcia vs COMELEC: When the
provisions of the Labor Code, words and phrases of a statute are
which entitle an unjustly clear and unequivocal, their meaning
dismissed employee to must be determined from the
reinstatement and full language employed, and the statute
backwages as Respondent must be taken to mean exactly what
Salazar as systems analyst it says. Verba legis applied.
was NOT proved that she ○ Why would we go against the
holds a position of trust and wordings of the law? The
confidence that would lead to framers of the election law
 STATCON NOTES

have already perceived what ● Spirit or intention of a statute

would happen in this time of prevails over the letter; in
the reckoning period from the contrast of verba legis.
date of proclamation itself ○ VL vs RLEA
and NOT from the date ■ VL- strictly from the
where the printed Certificate words/letter of the
of Canvass of Votes and law.
Proclamation (COCP) was ■ RLEA- from the
received. Because there are soul/spirit
opposing parties fleeing and ● The spirit, rather than the letter of a
closing offices so that no one law, determines its construction;
would receive it, and the hence, a statute, must be read
reckoning period would not according to its spirit and intent
start. SO VERBA LEGIS was (Paras vs. Comelec)
applied because Comelec ● When the reason of the law
intends that all election ceases, the law itself ceases
protests must be filed as (Cessante ratione legis, cessat et
soon as possible. (Justice ipsa lex).
Discussion: Garcia v. ○ The reason which induced
Commission) the legislature to enact a law
○ Verba legis principle dictates is the heart of the law.
that the provisions of the law ○ The reason for the law is the
should be applied as they are life of the law. A lifeless law
written, without deviation or is a dead law.
reinterpretation. In this case, ○ Additional notes: Raison
the court maintained that the d'etre– "reason for being" or
10-day period for filing an "reason to be"
election protest is to be ● A law should be construed as to be
reckoned from the date of in accordance with, and not
proclamation (& considering repugnant to/in conflict with, the
the manual COCP and spirit of the law.
Hornbook doctrine wherein ● Interpretation should not render the
that notice to the agent is law inutile/useless. An interpretation
notice to the principal), should be avoided under which a
reinforcing the importance of statute or provision being construed
adhering to the explicit is defeated, nullified, destroyed,
wording of the law. emasculated, repealed, explained
away, or rendered insignificant,
================================= meaningless, inoperative or
b. Ratio Legis Est Anima Legis (RLEA) nugatory.
● which means the reason of the law ● Paras vs. Comelec: It is presumed
is its soul that the legislature enacted an
● Interpretation according to the spirit effective law. The legislature
or reason of the law intended that a recall election must
 STATCON NOTES

be commenced in the 2nd yr of a ● Peo v. Almuete: Agricultural Tenancy

3-year term because the intention is Act is repealed by the Agricultural
that any elective local official may be Land Reform Code
the subject of a recall election “only ○ Agricultural Tenancy Act –
once” to give due to the public punishes prereaping or
accountability of our public officials. prethreshing of palay on a
Because to apply the law literally, date other than that
the law would be useless if previously set without the
considering SK and Barangay mutual consent of the
elections as regular elections with landlord and tenant o Share
the letter of the law “not earlier than tenancy relationship •
1 year of the appointment and not 1 ○ Agricultural Land Reform
year preceding the regular election”. Code – abolished share
If this would be taken literally/VL tenancy relationship, thus
then no more recall election would does not punish prereaping
happen. The LGC speaks about the or prethreshing of palay on a
periods of these elections. The SC date other than that
ruled with the “soul/reason” to give previously set without the
teeth to the law. RLEA applied. mutual consent of the
(Justice Discussion). landlord and tenant anymore
● "We admonish against a too-literal o Leasehold system
reading of the law as this is apt to ● Commendador v. De Villa
constrict rather than fulfill its purpose ○ Issue: whether PD 39, which
and defeat the intention of its withdrew the right to
authors. That intention is usually peremptorily challenge
found not in “the letter that killeth but members of a military
in the spirit that vivifieth” (Paras vs. tribunal, had been rendered
Comelec). inoperative by PD 2045
proclaiming the termination
Additional AGPALO notes and examples: of a state of martial law
● The reason of a statute may cease ○ Held: YES! The termination
in a given situation: of the martial law and the
○ When the purpose of the dissolution of military
statute sought to be achieved tribunals created thereunder,
is accomplished [See table at the reason for the existence
the end for the rules of of PD 39 ceased
repealing repealed laws.] automatically and the decree
○ When the mischief sought to itself ceased.
be repressed is prevented, ● Vasquez v. Giap –Where the
by an act or event mischief sought to be remedied by a
independent of the statute statute has already been removed in
itself. [ex. emergency a given situation, the statute may no
decrees] longer apply in such case.
 STATCON NOTES

○ The law bans aliens from between spouses during the

acquiring and owning lands, marriage is to prevent the possibility
the purpose is to preserve of undue influence and improper
the nation’s lands for future pressure being exerted by one
generations of Filipinos. A spouse on the other, for this same
sale of land in favor of an reason, this prohibition shall also
alien, in violation of the said apply also to common-law
law, no longer be questioned relationships. ML applied.
after the alien becomes a ○ Despite the liberal wordings
Filipino citizen. of the law that it is only
applicable to donations
================================= “during marriage”, SC
c. Mens Legislatores (ML) applied the provision also
● Means the intention of the outside of marriage because
lawmaker too strictly applying the
● the mind of the law is the prohibition would put
intention of the law, even if the donations outside marriage
intention is in contrast with the in a better position than
provisions of the law itself. donation during the marriage.
● Legislative intent or intent of the (Justice Discussion).
legislature or mens legislatoris is a ● Prasnick vs Republic: The reason
controlling factor in the construction for the silence of the law is obvious.
and interpretation of a law. That law/legislators evidently intends
● The letter of the law gives way to the to allow adoption whether the child
true intent of the legislature. be recognized or not. If the intention
● When a statute is susceptible of were to allow adoption only to
more than one construction, the unrecognized children, as
Courts shall adopt the construction contended, then the provision of
which will most tend to give effect to Article 338 would be of no useful
the intent of the legislature. purpose as this is already provided
● Ano man ang pagkukulang ng letter in Art. 337. The interpretation of the
of the law, ang magpupuno lang nun OSG would make Art 338 useless.
ay ang spirit of the law. – Whatever This does not follow mens
omission may be apparent in an legislatores.
interpretation purely literal of the ● Rather what the statute intended is
language used must be remedial by that adoption is deemed not merely
an adherence to its avowed an act to establish the relation of
objective. paternity and filiation but one which
● Matabuena vs Cervantes: It is a may give the child a legitimate
fundamental principle in statutory status. The rights of an
construction that what is within the acknowledged natural child are
spirit of the law is as much a part of much less than those of a legitimate
the law as what is written. Since the child and it is indeed to the great
reason for the ban on donations advantage to the latter if he be
 STATCON NOTES

given, even through legal fiction, a covered by the exemption. DLSL

legitimate status. ML applied. NOT applied.
● DLSL NOT applied– In relation to
================================= "dura lex sed lex," which means "the
d. Dura Lex Sed Lex (DLSL) law is harsh, but it is the law," the
● Means that the law may be harsh case illustrates the tension between
but it is still the law. strict adherence to legal
● It must be applied regardless of who requirements and the practical
may be affected, even if it may be realities of law enforcement. While
harsh or onerous. The law is the law. the law (Sec 879) may not have
● The duty of the court is limited to explicitly recognized the Governor's
inquiring into the legislative intent authority to issue a firearm permit,
and, once this is determined, to the SC acknowledged the necessity
making said intent effective. of allowing individuals in positions
● The principle requires that the like Macarandang's (secret agent) as
statute should be applied regardless a “peace officer” to carry firearms for
of whether it is unwise, hard or the purpose of maintaining peace
harsh. If the law is clear and free and order, thereby applying a more
from doubt, it is the sworn duty of flexible interpretation of the law in
the court to apply it without fear or this context.
favor, to follow its mandate, and not ● People vs. Mapa: The law
to tamper with it. (amended version) cannot be any
● Not limited to harsh law. clearer. No provision is made for a
● Another maxim expressive of the secret agent as such he is not
rule is hoc quidem perquam durum exempt. Our task is equally clear.
est, sed ita lex scripta est, or it is The first and fundamental duty of
exceedingly hard but so the law is courts is to apply the law.
written. Construction and interpretation
● People vs. Macarandang: come only after it has been
Abandoned the ruling of demonstrated that application is
Macarandang impossible or inadequate without
● Section 879 of the Revised them." The conviction of the accused
Administrative Code provides that must stand. Despite the ruling in
"peace officers" are exempted from Macarandang, the SC reversed
the requirements relating to the itself. DLSL was applied because:
issuance of license to possess ○ The amended law specified
firearms. The appointment of the each person exempted to
accused as secret agent to assist in carry firearms without
the maintenance of peace and order license/permit.
campaigns, and detection of crimes ○ The accused cannot rely on
sufficiently put him within the the ruling of People v.
category of a "peace officer" Macarandang as it is not
equivalent even to a member of the within the power of this Court
municipal police which is expressly to set aside the clear and
 STATCON NOTES

explicit mandate of a also convicted after

statutory provision. To the Macarandang?
extent that this decision ● The reckoning point on which
conflicts with what was held doctrine to be applied is the time of
in People v. Macarandang, it the apprehension of the accused.
no longer speaks with DLSL NOT applied.
authority. Additional AGPALO notes:
● This aligns with the legal maxim ● A decent regard to the legislative’s
"dura lex sed lex," underscoring the will should prohibit the court from
necessity of adhering to the law's engaging in judicial legislation to
stipulations regardless of individual change what it thinks are unrealistic
circumstances or claims of statutes that do not conform with
exemption. The court's decision ordinary experience or practice
reinforces the idea that the law (respeto nalang sa ating mga
must be uniformly applied to all mambabatas!)
individuals, thereby maintaining ● Where the law is clear, appeals to
the integrity and authority of legal justice and equity as justification to
statutes. (People vs. Mapa) construe it differently are unavailing
● People vs. Santayana: At the time – Philippines is governed by CIVIL
of appellant's apprehension the LAW or POSITIVE LAW, not
doctrine then prevailing is the case common law.
of People vs. Macarandang wherein ● GEN RULE: DLSL
the SC held that the appointment of ○ EXC: Equity is available only
a civilian as "secret agent is within in the absence of law and not
the category of a 'peace officer' its replacement – (so, pag
equivalent even to a member of the may law, walang equity
municipal police expressly covered equity! Pero pag walang law,
by Section 879, the exemption." pwedeng mag-equity,
● DATES: gets?!?... important to!)
○ People vs. Macarandang–
December 23, 1959 =================================
○ People vs Mapa– revoked e. Expressio Unius, Est Exclusio Alterius
the doctrine in the (EU EEA)
Macarandang case only on ● express mention of one person,
August 30, 1967. thing or consequence implies the
● Under the Macarandang rule exclusion of all others
therefore obtaining at the time of ● when the law does not include, it
appellant's appointment as secret excludes
agent, he incurred no criminal ○ even though all would have
liability for possession of the pistol in been implied had none been
question. DLSL applied. expressed; opposite the
○ Possible exam Q: Should doctrine of necessary
this now also result in the implication.
acquittal of Mapa that was
 STATCON NOTES

○ Expressum facit cessare is the only one mentioned in the law.

tacitum- what is expressed So, a 3rd runner up does not have
puts an end to what is the right as he is not included in the
implied; what is expressly enumeration of the law. EU EEA
limited to certain matters, it applied.
may not, by interpretation or ● The SC emphasized that the law
construction, be extended to expressly restricts the right to bring
other matters such actions to the
○ Kung list naman siya ng Attorney-General, provincial fiscals,
exceptions: exceptio firmat and individuals claiming to be
regulam in casibus non entitled to the office unlawfully held
exceptis– A general by another.
expression followed by ● It is to be inferred from this last
exceptions therefrom implies provision that the individuals who do
that those which do not fall not claim to have such a right [not
under the exceptions come belonging to the list] cannot bring an
within the scope of the action for usurpation of public office.
general expression. Stated ● A private person cannot maintain an
differently, a thing not being action for the removal of a public
excepted are within the officer unless he alleges that he is
purview of the general rule. entitled to the same office. EU EEA
[PAGCOR vs. BIR] applied.
○ These are canons of ● Green Star vs. Nissin-Universal:
restrictive interpretation. The summons was not properly
● REASON: Unless modified/ served on NURC, as it was received
amended, all laws are by a cost accountant, which is not in
forward-looking/prospective. the enumeration of the designated
EUEEA is important because persons under the rules for service
there are similar things that are of summons on a domestic
not yet in our mind at the moment corporation.
that CAN be covered later on. ● Service of summons must be made
● Where a statute is expressly limited only on the person expressly listed
to certain matters, it may not, by in the rules. If the revision committee
interpretation or construction, be intended to liberalize the rule on
extended to others. The rule service of summons, it could have
proceeds from the premise that the easily done so by clear and concise
legislature would not have made language. EU EEA applied.
specified enumerations in a statute ○ Persons serving summons
had the intention been not to restrict are exclusive in nature and
its meaning and to confine its terms no amount of substantial
to those expressly mentioned. justice is allowed. Because if
● Acosta vs Flor: Only those who they are not included in the
finished SECOND have the right to list, then there is IMPROPER
file an election protest because that SERVING of summons.
 STATCON NOTES

○ Ex. Summons is for Pres but not have been included and
it was served only to the manifest injustice will follow by not
Acting Pres = improper including them.
serving of summons because ➔ If its application will result in
of expressio Unius est incongruities/inappropriateness or
exclusio alterius. (Justice a violation of the EPC/equal
Discussion) protection clause of the
● PAGCOR vs. BIR: Not being Constitution.
excepted, petitioner PAGCOR must ➔ If adherence thereto would cause
be regarded as coming within the inconvenience, hardship, and injury
purview of the general rule that to the public interest.
GOCCs shall pay corporate income ➔ Where the enumeration is by way of
tax, expressed in the maxim: example or to remove doubts only
exceptio firmat regulam in casibus ➔ The question as to whether the
non exceptis wherein a thing not express enumeration of things,
being excepted are within the persons or consequences excludes
purview of the general rule. all others not mentioned depends
● The explicit mention of certain upon legislative intent.
GOCCs exempt from corporate
income tax in R.A. No. 9337 =================================
effectively excludes PAGCOR from f. Ejusdem Generis (EG)
such exemption. PAGCOR was ● Of the same kind
omitted from the list of exempt ● Requisites:
GOCCs in R.A. No. 9337, it is ○ Enumeration/lists FIRST
considered to fall under the general ○ THEN followed by general
rule that GOCCs must pay corporate word/terms
income tax. EU EEA applied. ● If these requisites are not satisfied,
● GEN RULE: express mention of there is no ejusdem generis.
one person, thing or consequence ● Q: Why does the Congress use
implies the exclusion of all others these general words “and the
Exceptions to applicability like” etc.
➔ Where other circumstances indicate ● A: Because Congress is also … of
that the enumeration was not its limitations. They know that
intended to be exclusive. laws are supposed to be
◆ If there are indications that FOREVER.
the law was meant to be ● Under the well-known principle of
broader, then other things ejusdem generis, the general
can be included as well. words following any enumeration
➔ Where a statute appears upon its being applicable only to things of
face to limit the operation of its the same kind or class as those
provision to particular persons or specifically referred.
things by enumerating them, but no ● Where specific and generic terms of
reason why other persons or the same nature are employed in the
things not so enumerated should same act, the latter following the
 STATCON NOTES

former. While in the abstract, general Congress to add it to the law.

terms are to be given their natural (Justice Discussion)
and full signification, yet where they ● U.S. vs Sto. Niño: ejusdem generis
follow specific words of a like nature must give way to the intent of the
they take their meaning from the law.
specific words, and are presumed to ● In this case, the SC ruled that the
embrace only things or persons of proviso in Act No. 1780, which
the kind designated by them. prohibited the carrying of concealed
● Mutuc vs. COMELEC: “The general deadly weapons, demonstrated a
words following any enumeration clear legislative intent to include
being applicable only to things of the weapons beyond those specifically
same kind or class as those listed. Hence, EG does NOT apply.
specifically referred to”. Here the The SC held that EG must give way
enumerated materials are all to the clear legislative intent
tangible in nature because the expressed in the proviso.
intention is designed to limit ○ "It shall be unlawful for any
expenses. person to carry concealed
● The Tape Jingle does not fall under about his person any bowie
ejusdem generis because it is knife, dirk, dagger, kris, or
intangible, a form of audio other deadly weapon:
propaganda, so it does not fall with Provided, That this
the enumeration of the law of prohibition shall not apply to
prohibited tangible materials ended firearms in the possession of
by the “and the likes.” The tape persons who have secured a
jingle does not fall with “and the license therefor or who are
likes.” EG NOT applied. entitled to carry same under
○ If I give away USB- EG the provisions of this Act."
applies. Yes prohibited under ● Therefore, the SC concluded that
the law to giveaway, because carrying a concealed iron bar, which
it is tangible = expenses. is also a deadly weapon, even if not
○ If tape jingle- NOT EG. No specifically listed in the statute,
because intangible = no would still violate the law. The intent
expenses . encompass a wider range of deadly
○ If casette tape- Yes, because weapons
tangible = expenses. ● Q: Does “the deadly weapon”
○ If Ipad- Yes, because include an unlicensed revolver?
tangible = expenses. ● A: Yes! Carrying such would be in
○ BECAUSE there are other violation of statute. By the
materials there that may be proviso, it manifested its intention
used in the future, kaya may to include in the prohibition
“and the likes” kasi di naman weapons other than armas
pwede na everytime may blancas/sharp weapons therein
new tangible material, u go to specified.
congress and ask for
 STATCON NOTES

● (Different from Justice’s Discussion): followed by a general word or

Ejusdem generis is not applicable if phrase;
enumeration is already 2. the particular and specific words
COMPLETE. constitute a class or are of the same
● “Other deadly weapons” is not kind;
considered a general term compared 3. the enumeration of the particular and
to the specific materials because the specific words is NOT
enumeration is already complete in exhaustive/complete or is NOT
itself as covered by the law. EG NOT merely by examples; and
applied. 4. there is no indication of legislative
● Parayno vs. Jovellanos: A intent to give the general words or
"gasoline filling station” is not of the phrases a broader meaning [not
same kind as a "gasoline service intended to be broad],
station" as the Official Zoning Code
provided a clear distinction EXCEPTION to the rule of ejusdem
between "gasoline service station" generis
and "gasoline filling station." Hence, ➔ The general rule that a general term
two different things. may be restrained by specific words
● Respondents could not insist that associated with it is applicable only
“gasoline service station” under to cases where, except for one
Section 44 necessarily included general term [yung general term
“gasoline filling station” under yung black sheep], all the items in
Section 21. Indeed, the activities an enumeration belong to or fall
undertaken in a “gas service station” under one specific class or are of the
did not automatically embrace those same nature.
in a “gas filling station.” ➔ Where the enumeration includes
● Therefore, the principle of ejusdem classes and general terms as well,
generis, "of the same kind, class or or where the specific things in the
nature," was not applicable to the enumeration have no
case as a "gasoline filling station” distinguishable common
does not take its meaning from the characteristics and greatly differ
same nature of a "gasoline service from one another.
station”. ➔ If the enumerated words are all
● The maxim expressio unius est general words, the meaning of
exclusio alterius is the applicable each word will be unrestricted by the
principle, finding that Section 44 of other words, unless the context in
the zoning ordinance explicitly which they are used indicates
mentions only "gasoline service otherwise.
stations." ➔ Where the enumeration of the
particular and specific words is
GEN RULES of ejusdem generis/ exhaustive/complete
REQUISITES: ➔ Where a statute uses a general
1. a statute contains an enumeration of word first, then followed by an
particular and specific words, enumeration of specific words
 STATCON NOTES

[baliktad yung format] embraced

within the general word merely as
examples, the enumeration does not
thereby restrict the meaning of the
general word, but should include
others of the same class although
not enumerated therein.
 STATCON NOTES

=================================
g. Cassus Omissus Pro Omisso
Habendus Est
● A person, object, or thing omitted
from an enumeration in a statute
must be held to have been
omitted intentionally.

h. Noscitur A Sociis
● to remove doubt refer to the
meaning of associated or
companion words
● where a particular word or phrase
is ambiguous in itself or equally
susceptible of various meanings,
its correct construction may be
made clear and specific by
considering the company of
words in which it is found or with
which it is associated.