A2015 Legal Method Finals Reviewer - Molo

1 LEGAL METHOD Reviewer | Prof. John Molo | A2015 Karren Mae De Chavez, Amirah Peñalber, Pauline Marie Gairanod, Micaela Peña, Cielo Marjorie Goño, Kristine Mae Manalo

LEGAL METHOD

FINALS REVIEWER – A2015

SESSION 3

STARE DECISIS, RES JUDICATA, LAW OF THE CASE

STARE DECISIS

Principle: Like cases ought to be decided alike.

A conclusion or judgment reached in one case

should be applied to those that follow if the facts

are substantially the same, even if the parties

may be different.

It is a rule of precedent.

A guarantee that the system, how judges make

their decisions, works in certain manner.

The judgment referred to in this principle is that

of the Supreme Court.

Sir Molo’s Diagram

This was how Sir Molo depicted the way judges

decide on cases, specifically how they select the

facts. According to him, judges differ in

perceptions as to which facts are

relevant/material and which are not. One judge

may consider the 2 objects the same while

others would not.

Case: Villena v Chavez

FACTS: Petitioners are the residents of the land owned by

the respondents. Respondents aver that the petitioners

failed to pay the agreed monthly equity and as such, they

forfeited their right to reside in the therein. They also said

that the petitioners were residing there without a

contract and merely out of the liberality and tolerance of

the owners. Petitioners answered that they were willing

to pay but the originator refused to accept their payments

without justifiable reasons.

ISSUE: WON the petitioners may lawfully be evicted from

the property based on the contention of the respondents.

HELD: NO. The agreement to pay equity is tantamount to

a “contract” thus, the rightful action was either to enforce

payment or to rescind the contract. In its reasoning, the

SC cited precedent case in which it ruled that the proper

action for such a case is specific performance or rescission

of the contract there being an actual agreement.

From Agpalo:

The decision of the SC applying or interpreting a

statute is controlling with respect to the interpretation of

that statute and is of greater weight than that of an

executive or administrative officer in the construction of

other statutes of similar import.

Past decisions of the court must be followed in the

adjudication of cases: Stare decisis et non quieta movere,

one should follow past precedents and should not disturb

what has been settled.

Where the court resolved a question merely sub

silencio, its decision does not come within the maxim of

stare decisis

Nor does an opinion expressed by the way, not up to

the point in the issue, fall within the maxim; it is merely

an obiter dictum

The rule of stare decisis is not absolute. If found

contrary to law, it must be abandoned.

RES JUDICATA

Cases judicially determined are conclusively

settled by judgment and may not be litigated in a

subsequent action between the substantially

identical parties, regardless of the form it may

take.

Substantially identical:

Cause of Action

Law

Right

Damage

Parties

Facts

Case: Veloso v CA

FACTS: Petitioners and respondents are relatives fighting

over a land inherited from their great grandmother. The

title of the land was previously granted to the


respondents. Petitioner sought to take the land back and

filed this petition.

ISSUE: WON the case may still be decided.

HELD: NO. The new case filed by the petitioner is barred

by res judicata since the previous and the current case

involves identical facts, issues and parties.

LAW OF THE CASE

A previous holding by a higher court is prevailing

over the particular case.

When an appellate court decides on the case and

it is remanded to lower courts, the decision of

the former is binding upon the latter.

Case: Agustin v. CA

FACTS: Petitioner defaulted in his payment of the loan.

The chattel mortgage over the truck was foreclosed. The

creditor filed a petition for further payment of repairs and

costs of obtaining the truck from the petitioner. RTC

dismissed the petition and the creditor filed to the CA. CA

granted the additional fees against the debtor and

remanded the case to RTC to determine the cost. Debtor

is now appealing to the RTC for the additional liability

imposed upon him.

ISSUE: WON the RTC may decide on whether the debtor is

liable for additional fees/expenses

HELD: NO. The CA decision to award additional costs

against the debtor is final (law of the case). RTC may only

determine the amount of additional cost but may not

revise the CA decision.

SESSION 4

PARTS OF A DECISION

Ponente - Justice writing the majority opinion

Syllabus – Not a part of the actual decision;

provides the summary of the discussion in topical

order.

According to the case of Velarde v Social Justice

Society, the parts of the case are:

Statement of the Case – legal definition

of the nature of the action; describes

the specific charge and the plea of the

accused; It also includes a short

description of the proceedings

Includes: Case number, Court

of origin, whether on appeal or

for certiorari

Statement of Facts

Objective or Reportorial

Method – the judge

summarizes facts, testimonies

and exhibits without including

his comments

CRIMINAL CASES

Synthesis Method – both sides

of the petition are summarized

according to the judge’s best

light

CIVIL CASES

Subjective Method – the facts

accepted by the judge are

simply narrated without

explaining what the parties

versions are

Combination of Objective and

Subjective – both sides are

reported and the judge

formulates his own accepted

version of the facts

ISSUES or ASSIGNMENT OF ERRORS –

both factual and legal issues should be

stated; additional issues may also be

raised if substantial to the decision

COURT RULING – full discussion of the

issues raised; ideally, each issue should

be discussed separately

DISPOSITIVE PORTION – statement of

the findings of innocence or guilt, the

specific fault or crime committed,

penalty imposed, modifying

circumstances; This is where the court

states whether the petition is granted,

denied or dismissed.

4 Cs - CLEAR, CONCISE,

COMPLETE AND CORRECT

Test of COMPLETENESS

Parties should know

come to know their

rights

How to execute the

decision

No need for another

proceeding to dispose

of the issues


Should be terminated

according to proper

relief

Obiter Dictum – An opinion expressed by a court

upon some question of law which is not

necessary to the decision of the case before it. It

is a remark, “by the way”; it is not binding as a

precedent. (Agpalo)

Separate Opinions (Concurring and Dissenting) –

Opinions written by the other justices of the

court which deviates partly or wholly from the

majority opinion. They may serve as guide in

deciding future cases.

SESSION 5

TESTING, TESTING

Testing – done when a law is measured against a

right.

Political Question - A question, the determination

of which a prerogative of the legislative or

executive branch of the government, so as not

be appropriate for judicial inquiry or

adjudication. It involves the exercise of discretion

by the executive or the legislative branch thereby

pertaining to its wisdom which the judiciary may

not validly examine or look into.

Rational Basis Test concerns constitutional issues on due

process and equal protection lowest level of scrutiny tests whether a government action employs

reasonable means to an end that may be legitimately pursued by government

government action must be RATIONALLY RELATED to a LEGITIMATE government interest

Compelling State interest test (Sherbert test from the case of Sherbert v Vener)

Compelling state interest Narrowly tailored to achieve interest Must be least restrictive means employed

Free exercise – to be able to exercise rights without

discrimination based on religion, race, etc.

Free speech – to be able to say or write anything or to

not do as you wish; freedom from compulsion to do

(non-verbal speech) or say what you do not want to.

1. GOBITIS TEST

(from the case of Minersville School v Gobitis)

FACTS: Minor plaintiffs were prevented from attending

school because of their refusal to salute the national flag.

The children Jehovah’s Witnesses and were raised to

believe that to salute the national flag was forbidden by

command of scripture.

HELD: SC ruled that religious freedom was not infringed

when the school required that students salute and

respect the flag.

TEST:

1. General Application – that the law was not

directed against doctrinal loyalties of particular

sects

2. Does not discriminate nor advance any religion

2. BARNETTE TEST

(from the case of West Virginia State v Barnette)

FACTS: The Board of Education required that teachers and

pupils salute and honor the nation represented by the flag

AND that refusal is considered insubordination which shall

be dealt with expulsion.

HELD: Free Speech cannot be subordinated by the State

Interest.

3. BRANDENBURG TEST

- where such advocacy is directed to inciting or producing

imminent lawless action, it may be regulated by the State.

4. MORSE TEST (School Speech Test)

– in this case, the Court held that First Amendment Right

(to free speech) does not apply to school

1. Materially disruptive speech

2. The speech is against school interest

Brought to you by: Kaye De Chavez

SESSION 6

FOUNDATIONS OF OUR LEGAL SYSTEM

Tripartite system of Government


o Three branches of government, co-equals and co-extensive.

o Created for protection against abuse

Power to Construe o AGPALO: A condition sine qua non before

the court may construe or interpret a statute, is that there be doubt or ambiguity in its language. The province of construction lies wholly within the domain of ambiguity. Where there is no ambiguity in the words of a statute, there is no room for construction.

A statute is ambiguous when it is capable of being understood by reasonably well-informed persons in either of two senses.

Where the law is free from ambiguity, the court may not introduce exceptions or conditions where none is provided.

A meaning that does not appear nor is intended or reflected in the very language of the statute cannot be placed therein be construction.

Where the two statutes that apply to a particular case, that which was specifically designed for the said case must prevail over the other.

When the SC has laid down a principle of law as applicable to a certain state of facts, it will adhere to that principle and apply it to all future cases where the facts are substantially the same.

Judicial rulings have no retroactive effect.

The court may issue guidelines in applying the statute, not to enlarge or restrict it but to clearly delineate what the law requires. This is not judicial legislation but an act to define what the law is.

Limitations to Construction o Court may not construe when there is no

ambiguity o Courts may not enlarge nor restrict statutes. o Courts may not be influenced by questions

of wisdom.

CASES:

Endencia v David

Pastor M. Endencia and Fernando Jugo, plaintiffs and

appellees vs. Saturnino David, defendant and appellant

FACTS:

The Court of First Instance of Manila declared

section 13 of R.A. 590, which states in part that ―no

salary wherever received by any public officer of the

Republic of the Philippines shall be considered exempt

from the income tax‖, as unconstitutional and ordered

appellant Saturnino David, Collector of Internal Revenue,

to refund certain sums of money representing the income

tax collected from the salaries of plaintiffs and appellees

Justice Pastor M. Endencia and Justice Fernando Jugo.

ISSUE: WON Republic Act No. 590, particularly section 13,

can justify and legalize the collection of income tax on the

salary of judicial officers.

HELD/RATIO: YES.(a) The Constitution is the fundamental

law. When there is a conflict between the Constitution

and a law, the law will have to give way and has to be

declared invalid and unconstitutional.

(b) The duty to interpret the law rests on the judiciary and

not on the legislative branch of the government

(separation of powers). The legislature only has the power

to make and enact laws. Through section 13 of R.A. 590,

Congress says that payment of income tax is not to be

treated as a diminution of the salaries of justices, which is

a clear example of interpretation.

(c) Considering the practical side of the case, the Court

believes that that the collection of income tax on a salary

is an actual and evident diminution thereof. When

computed, the official does not actually receive his salary

in full.

(d) The exemption of judicial officers from paying taxes on

their salaries promotes the independence of the Judiciary.

Decision: The decision appealed from is affirmed.

Angara v Electoral Commission

Jose A. Angara, petitioner, vs. The Electoral Commission,

Pedro Ynsua, Miguel Castillo and Dionision C. Mayor,

respondents

FACTS: On December 9, The Electoral Commission2,

stated Petitioner Angara, filed for the issuance of a writ of

prohibition to prohibit the Electoral Commission from

recognizing the ―motion of protest‖ filed by Pedro Ynsua,

his election rival.

On October 7, 1935, The provincial board

proclaimed Angara winner afterwhich he took his oath on

November 15. By December 3, Resolution No. 8 of the

National Assembly confirmed his election. However, on

December 8, Ynsua filed his motion of protest.

On December 9, the Electoral Commission decided that

December 9, 1935 would be the last day for the


―presentation of protests against the election of any

member of the National Assembly‖ Angara argued that he

was already confirmed as a member of the National

Assembly through the Resolution No. 8 therefore filing of

protest ended upon the resolutions proclamation. Ynsau

was therefore late in filing for protest. Ynsua argues that

there was no constitutional or legal provision which

stated that members of the national assembly could not

be contested after confirmation via Resolution No. 8.

After Electoral Commission denies Angara‘s petition to

dismiss the protest, Angara petitions to the Supreme

court to review the jurisdiction of the Electoral

Commission.

ISSUE:

A. WON the Supreme Coart has jurisdiction over the

Electoral Commission and the subject matter of the

controversy. (Issue A is the focus of Molo discussion on

Power to Construe Limitations)

B. WON the Electoral Commission acted without or in

excess of jurisdiction in accepting protests despite the

proclamation of elected officials by the National Assembly

HELD AND RATIO:

A. Yes, The Electoral Commission is under the jurisdiction

of the Electoral Commission. Despite clear separation of

powers between the legislative (where the Electoral

Commission is located), the executive, and the judiciary,

check and balances exist to maintain coordination

between all. In cases of controversy, the ―judicial

department is the only constitutional organ which can be

called upon to determine proper allocation of powers

between several departments‖ through ―judicial

supremacy.

B. Yes, the Electoral Commission had jurisdiction. The

National Assembly created the Electoral Commission to

be an INDEPENDENT, QUASI- JUDICIAL BODY of powers

specific to election concerns. Regulation of Rules and

protests if election related are within their jurisdiction

regardless of proclamations made by the National

Assembly.

Separation of Powers:

Hamdan v Rumsfeld

Facts of the Case:

Salim Ahmed Hamdan, Osama bin Laden's

former chauffeur, was captured by Afghani forces and

imprisoned by the U.S. military in Guantanamo Bay. He

filed a petition for a writ of habeas corpus in federal

district court to challenge his detention. Before the

district court ruled on the petition, he received a hearing

from a military tribunal, which designated him an enemy

combatant.

A few months later, the district court granted Hamdan's

habeas petition, ruling that he must first be given a

hearing to determine whether he was a prisoner of war

under the Geneva Convention before he could be tried by

a military commission. The Circuit Court of Appeals for

the District of Columbia reversed the decision, however,

finding that the Geneva Convention could not be enforced

in federal court and that the establishment of military

tribunals had been authorized by Congress and was

therefore not unconstitutional.

Question:

May the rights protected by the Geneva Convention be

enforced in federal court through habeas corpus

petitions? Was the military commission established to try

Hamdan and others for alleged war crimes in the War on

Terror authorized by the Congress or the inherent powers

of the President?

Conclusion:

Yes and no. The Supreme Court, in a 5-to-3

decision authored by Justice John Paul Stevens, held that

neither an act of Congress nor the inherent powers of the

Executive laid out in the Constitution expressly authorized

the sort of military commission at issue in this case.

Absent that express authorization, the commission had to

comply with the ordinary laws of the United States and

the laws of war. The Geneva Convention, as a part of the

ordinary laws of war, could therefore be enforced by the

Supreme Court, along with the statutory Uniform Code of

Military Justice. Hamdan's exclusion from certain parts of

his trial deemed classified by the military commission

violated both of these, and the trial was therefore illegal.

Justices Scalia, Thomas, and Alito dissented. Chief Justice

John Roberts, who participated in the case while serving

on the DC Circuit Court of Appeals, did not take part in the

decision.

Boumediene v Bush

Facts of the Case:

In 2002 Lakhdar Boumediene and five other

Algerian natives were seized by Bosnian police when U.S.

intelligence officers suspected their involvement in a plot

to attack the U.S. embassy there. The U.S. government

classified the men as enemy combatants in the war on


terror and detained them at the Guantanamo Bay Naval

Base, which is located on land that the U.S. leases from

Cuba. Boumediene filed a petition for a writ of habeas

corpus, alleging violations of the Constitution's Due

Process Clause, various statutes and treaties, the common

law, and international law.

The District Court judge granted the

government's motion to have all of the claims dismissed

on the ground that Boumediene, as an alien detained at

an overseas military base, had no right to a habeas

petition. The U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit

affirmed the dismissal but the Supreme Court reversed

in Rasul v. Bush, which held that the habeas statute

extends to non-citizen detainees at Guantanamo.

In 2006, Congress passed the Military

Commissions Act of 2006 (MCA). The Act eliminates

federal courts' jurisdiction to hear habeas applications

from detainees who have been designated (according to

procedures established in the Detainee Treatment Act of

2005) as enemy combatants. When the case was

appealed to the D.C. Circuit for the second time, the

detainees argued that the MCA did not apply to their

petitions, and that if it did, it was unconstitutional under

the Suspension Clause. The Suspension Clause reads: "The

Privilege of the Writ of Habeas Corpus shall not be

suspended, unless when in Cases of Rebellion or Invasion

the public Safety may require it."

The D.C. Circuit ruled in favor of the government

on both points. It cited language in the MCA applying the

law to "all cases, without exception" that pertain to

aspects of detention. One of the purposes of the MCA,

according to the Circuit Court, was to overrule the

Supreme Court's opinion in Hamdan v. Rumsfeld, which

had allowed petitions like Boumediene's to go forward.

The D.C. Circuit held that the Suspension Clause only

protects the writ of habeas corpus as it existed in 1789,

and that the writ would not have been understood in

1789 to apply to an overseas military base leased from a

foreign government. Constitutional rights do not apply to

aliens outside of the United States, the court held, and

the leased military base in Cuba does not qualify as inside

the geographic borders of the U.S. In a rare reversal, the

Supreme Court granted certiorari after initially denying

review three months earlier.

Question:

1. Should the Military Commissions Act of 2006 be

interpreted to strip federal courts of jurisdiction

over habeas petitions filed by foreign citizens

detained at the U.S. Naval Base at Guantanamo

Bay, Cuba?

2. If so, is the Military Commissions Act of 2006 a

violation of the Suspension Clause of the

Constitution?

3. Are the detainees at Guantanamo Bay entitled to

the protection of the Fifth Amendment right not

to be deprived of liberty without due process of

law and of the Geneva Conventions?

4. Can the detainees challenge the adequacy of

judicial review provisions of the MCA before they

have sought to invoke that review?

Conclusion:

A five-justice majority answered yes to each of

these questions. The opinion, written by Justice Anthony

Kennedy, stated that if the MCA is considered valid its

legislative history requires that the detainees' cases be

dismissed. However, the Court went on to state that

because the procedures laid out in the Detainee

Treatment Act are not adequate substitutes for the

habeas writ, the MCA operates as an unconstitutional

suspension of that writ. The detainees were not barred

from seeking habeas or invoking the Suspension Clause

merely because they had been designated as enemy

combatants or held at Guantanamo Bay. The Court

reversed the D.C. Circuit's ruling and found in favor of the

detainees. Justice David H. Souter concurred in the

judgment. Chief Justice John G. Roberts and Justice

Antonin Scalia filed separate dissenting opinions.

Youngstown vs. Sawyer

Facts of the Case:

In April of 1952, during the Korean War,

President Truman issued an executive order directing

Secretary of Commerce Charles Sawyer to seize and

operate most of the nation's steel mills. This was done in

order to avert the expected effects of a strike by the

United Steelworkers of America.

Question:

Did the President have the constitutional authority to

seize and operate the steel mills?

Conclusion:

In a 6-to-3 decision, the Court held that the

President did not have the authority to issue such an

order. The Court found that there was no congressional

statute that authorized the President to take possession

of private property. The Court also held that the

President's military power as Commander in Chief of the

Armed Forces did not extend to labor disputes. The Court

argued that "the President's power to see that the laws


are faithfully executed refutes the idea that he is to be a

lawmaker.

SESSION 7

PRESUMPTION OF CONSTITUTIONALITY

Presumption of Constitutionality o All laws are presumed valid and

constitutional unless clear proof is presented to the contrary stems from the presumption of regularity of the functions performed by the legislature

When Laws take effect o 15 days after publication in 2

newspapers of general circulation or in the official gazette

o Administrative agencies also need to file 3 copies with the UP law center

Repeal - Laws are presumed to be valid until repealed (express, implied, sunset provision.) Repeal will result in revocation of legal effect and existence of law.

Computation of time – time span in days count calendar days not working days

o A week – 7 consecutive days, A day – 24 hours, a year – 365 days

CASES:

Morfe v Mutuc (c/o Roe Anuncio’s digest) Facts:

The Congress enacted the Anti-Graft and Corrupt

Practices Act which aimed to prevent public officials and

employees from committing acts of dishonesty and foster

morality in public service.

The Act provides for certain procedures in the

pursuit of its goal, one of which is the declaration of the

official’s or employee’s assets and liabilities through a

“true detailed and sworn statement” upon assumption of

office and “within the month of January of every other

year thereafter.”

Herein petitioner, as a government official, filed

a petition challenging the constitutionality of the said

provision. The lower court ruled in favor of the petitioner,

declaring the provision unconstitutional.

Herein defendant appealed.

Arguments:

Plaintiff: The provision as a requirement is oppressive and

unconstitutional.

Corruption among officials and employees is

presumed and cannot be trusted to desist

from committing corrupt practices.

Defendant: Upon assumption of public office and until

such time as he continues to discharge

public trust, a government official is

deemed to have voluntarily assumed the

obligation to give the information about his

personal affair. The public life of an

employee cannot be segregated from his

private life.

Issues:

WON the periodical submission “within the month of

January of every other year thereafter” of sworn

statements of assets and liabilities of an official or

employee violates due process being an oppressive

exercise of police power;

WON this requirement unlawfully invades the

constitutional right to privacy, unreasonable searches and

seizure, and prohibition against self-incrimination

Ruling/Ratio:

The provision is CONSTITUTIONAL. The decision of the

lower court is thus reversed.

Statutes enjoy the presumption of validity.

The required periodical submission does not

violate due process as it is not an oppressive exercise of

police power.

Due process is freedom from arbitrariness.

To prevent a public office inherently decorated

with the temptations to heed the call of greed and avarice

from abuse is not arbitrariness.

Police power is the power to promote general welfare

and public interest, in the course of which a curtailment

of liberty is entailed.

In this case, the police power is to promote

morality in public service. Curtailment of liberty is

allowable in view of this end, and for as long as due

process is observed (investigation, hearings, etc.)

Ermita-Malate Hotel Case: The permissible scope

of regulatory measure is wider when the liberty

curtailed affects the right to property, rather

than freedom of mind and of person.

*

Right to privacy, freedom from unreasonable searches

and seizure, and prohibition against self-incrimination are

not invaded.

*Right to privacy


Rational Relationship: the end sought and the

means employed have rational relationship.

Right to privacy is NOT unconstitutionally

intruded upon.

*Right to be free from unreasonable searches

and seizure

“Every man is under obligation to give

testimony…only under judicial sanctions.”

*Prohibition from self-incrimination

No constitutional provision shall protect a man’s

conduct from judicial inquiry, or aid him in

fleeing from justice.

An insult to the personal integrity and official

dignity of public officials? THIS IS AN INQUIRY

INTO THE WISDOM OF THE LAW, which the Court

is not in the position to decide.

Tanada v Tuvera Facts:

Invoking the people's right to be informed on matters of public concern, a right recognized in the Constitution, as well as the principle that laws to be valid and enforceable must be published in the OG or otherwise effectively promulgated, petitioners seek a writ of mandamus to compel respondent public officials to publish, and/or cause the publication in the Official Gazette of various PDs, LOIs, general orders, proclamations, EOs, letters of implementation and administrative orders. Respondents contend, among others that publication in the OG is not a sine qua non requirement for the effectivity of laws where the laws themselves provide for their own effectivity dates. It is thus submitted that since the presidential issuances in question contain special provisions as to the date they are to take effect, publication in the OG is indispensable for their effectivity.

Issue:

Whether publication is still required in light of the clause

“unless otherwise provided”

Ruling:

1. The clause “unless it is otherwise provided” in Article 2

of the Civil Code, refers to the

date of effectivity and not to the requirement of

publication itself, which cannot in any event be

omitted.

2. This clause does not mean that the legislature may

make the law effective immediately

upon approval, or on any other date, without its previous

publication. The legislature may in its

discretion provide that the usual fifteen-day period shall

be shortened or extended.

3. Publication requirements applies to (1) all statutes,

including those of local application and private laws; (2)

presidential decrees and executive orders promulgated by

the President in the exercise of legislative powers

whenever the same are validly delegated by the

legislature or directly

conferred by the Constitution; (3) Administrative rules

and regulations for the purpose of

enforcing or implementing existing law pursuant also to a

valid delegation; (4) Charter of a city

notwithstanding that it applies to only a portion of the

national territory and directly affects only

the inhabitants of that place; (5) Monetary Board circulars

to ³ill in the details of the Central

Bank Act which that body is supposed to enforce.. The

publication of all presidential issuances "of a public

nature" or "of general applicability" is mandated by law.

The clear object of the law is to give the general public

adequate notice of the various laws w/c are to regulate

their actions and conduct as citizens.

1. Further, publication must be in full or it is no publication at all since its purpose is to inform the public of the contents of the laws.

Rationale:

1. Without such notice and publication, there would be no basis for the application of the maxim "ignorantia legis non excusat." It would be the height of injustice to punish or otherwise burden a citizen for the transgression of a law of w/c he had no notice whatsoever, not even a constructive one. It is needless to say that the publication of presidential issuances "of a public nature" or "of general applicability" is a requirement of due process. It is a rule of law that before a person may be bound by law, he must first be officially and specifically informed of its contents.

The Supreme Court declared that all laws as above

defined shall immediately upon their approval, or as soon

thereafter as possible, be published in full in the Official

Gazette, to become effective only after 15 days from their

publication, or on another date specified by the

legislature, in accordance with Article 2 of the Civil Code.

Philippine National Bank vs. Court of Appeals

(c/o Vina Villarroya’s digest)


Relevant law: The notices of sale on extra-judicial

foreclosure of real estate mortgage are required to be

posted for not less than twenty days in at least three

public places of the municipality or city where the

property is situated, and if such property is worth more

than four hundred pesos, such notices shall also be

published once a week for at least three consecutive

weeks in a newspaper of general circulation in the

municipality or city.

- Sec. 3 of R.A. 3135 – An Act to Regulate the Sale

of Property Under Special Powers Inserted In or

Annexed to Real Estate Mortgages

Facts:

1. Two lots located in Bulacan were mortgaged to PNB. These lots were under the common names of Epifanio dela Cruz, his brother Delfin, and his sister Maria.

2. The lots were mortgaged to guarantee the ff. promissory notes:

a. a promissory note for P12, 000, dated September 2, 1958, and payable within 69 days (date of maturity – Nov. 10, 1958)

b. a promissory note for P4, 000, dated September 22, 1958, and payable within 49 days (date of maturity – Nov. 10, 1958)

c. a promissory note for P4, 000, dated June 30, 1958 and payable within 120 days (date of maturity – Nov. 10, 1958)

3. On September 6, 1961, PNB presented a foreclosure petition of the two lots before the Sheriff’s Office at Bulacan.

4. The lots were sold with PNB as the highest bidder.

5. A certificate of sale was granted to them, and a final deed of sale was then registered in the Bulacan Registry of Property.

6. Years later, PNB sold the lots to spouses Conrado de Vera and Marina de Vera.

7. The original owners of the lots sought reconveyance of the lots since they claimed that PNB unlawfully foreclosed it.

8. CFI (Court of First Instance) dismissed the case against PNB. However, CA reversed this decision and declared the auction sale of the foreclosed pieces of realty, the final deed of sale, and the consolidation of ownership void inter alia on the ground that PNB failed to comply with the legal requirement of publication. (PNB published the Notices of Sale on March 28, April 11, and April

12, 1969 – law states that it must be published once a week for at least 3 consecutive weeks)

Issue: WON there was valid compliance in regard to the

required publication.

Held: No. Decision of CA is affirmed.

Ratio: According to PNB, there was no breach of the

proviso since after the first publication on March 28, the

second notice was published on April 11 (Friday – last day

of the second week), while the third publication on April

12 (Saturday – first day of the third week).

Court’s response

This rests on the erroneous impression that the day on which the first publication was made (March 28) should be excluded pursuant to Par. 3, Art. 13 of CC. (“In computing a period, the first day shall be excluded, and the last day included.”)

Art. 13 is actually silent on the definition of a “week.” In Concepcion vs. Zandueta, this term was interpreted as a period of time consisting of 7 consecutive days.

Hence, the period for the first week should be reckoned from March 28 to April 3, second week April 4 to April 10.

“Where the word is used simply as a measure of duration of time and without reference to the calendar, it means a period of seven consecutive days without regard to the day of the week on which it begins.”

Brought to you by: Pauline Marie Gairanod

SESSION 8

A CONSTITUTION

Constitution defined:

A constitution is a fundamental law which sets

up a form of government and defines and delimits the

powers thereof and those of its officers, reserving to the

people themselves plenary sovereignty. (Legaspi v.

Ministry of Finance)

Purpose

prescribes the permanent framework of a system

of government


assigns to the different departments their

respective powers and duties

establishes certain fixed principles on which

government is founded

*The fundamental conception is that it is a supreme law

to which all other laws must conform and in accordance

with which all private rights must be determined and all

public authority administered. (Manila Prince Hotel v.

GSIS)

*OTHER NOTES:

The Constitution only limits government power

but not the Bill of Rights.

It is also possible for the Constitution to retroact.

It informs the people what their rights are.

It is the only document that goes down to the

masses to be explicitly ratified.

*Nitafan v. CIR

*Filoteo v. Sandiganbayan

Language

The primary source from which to ascertain

constitutional intent or purpose is the language

of the constitution itself.

The presumption is that the words in which the

constitutional provisions are couched express the

objective sought to be attained. (J.M. Tuason &

Co., Inc v. Land Tenure Administration)

It is the people’s document so the language must

be understood in its most common sense except

in cases where technical terms are employed.

J.M. Tuason & Co., Inc. vs. Land Tenure Administration

Doctrine: The Living Constitution Theory which describes

that the Constitution must be construed as enduring for

ages. It embodies not only rules for the passing hour, but

principles for an expanding future as well. Hence, words

employed therein are not to be construed to yield fixed

and rigid answers. It should be flexible and

accommodative enough to meet adequately whatever

problems the future has in store.

*The textual/originalist approach, is where the text of the

Constitution is interpreted according to the clear and

ordinary meaning of its words. The text itself must first

be ambiguous or vague before construction is to be

applied.

SESSION 9

RULES OF CONSTRUCTION

Text Matters

Starting point: actual text. Why? Because what

the people ratified is the text itself and not the

interpretation or theory

1. Determine whether or not the text is clear and

whether or not there is sufficient ambiguity.

2. Look at the historical background.

3. Interpret to give life to the Constitution’s intent.

The intent of the framers however, is just a piece

of evidence. It is not the end goal.

POLITICAL QUESTION DOCTRINE is determined

by finding out whether or not there is a textually

demonstrable commitment by the Constitution

to the other branches of government. It is a

political question if the Constitution itself

mandates that branch or instrumentality to do

something or vests a specific power upon that

branch.

Sarmiento vs. Mison

Held: The president acted with her constitutional authority and power in the appointment of Salvador Mison as the Commissioner of Bureau of Customs. Submission to CA for confirmation is not required because Mison falls under the last group (only the 1st group of appointees requires confirmation). He is thus entitled to exercise the full authority and functions of the office and to receive all the salaries and emoluments pertaining thereto. The clear and express intent of the framers of the 1987 Constitution was to EXCLUDE presidential appointments from confirmation by the CA except appointments of officers expressly mentioned in the first sentence of Sec 16 Art VII of the Constitution.

IBP vs. Zamora

Held: The president has already determined the necessity and factual basis for calling the armed forces. Considering all these facts, we hold that the president has sufficient factual basis to call for military aid in law enforcement and in the exercise of constitutional power. This Court is not inclined to overrule the president’s determination of the factual basis for the calling of the mArines to prevent or suppose lawless violence.

Marcelino vs. Cruz


Facts: Petitioner claims that the three-month period prescribed by section 11 (1) of art X of the 1973 constitution being a constitutional directive, is MANDATORY in character and that non observance thereof results in the loss of jurisdiction of the court over the unresolved case Held: In this case, the statute under examination was construed merely to be directory. It was ruled that the legal distinction between directory and mandatory laws is applicable to fundamental as it is to statutory laws. This court had at various times, upon proper application and for meritorious reasons, allowed judges of inferior courts additional time beyond the 3-month period w/in w/c to decide cases submitted to them. The reason is that a departure from said provision would result in less injury to the general public than would its strict application.

An absurd situation could not have been intended by the framers of our fundamental law—to hold that non compliance by the courts w/ the aforesaid provision would result in loss of jurisdiction, would make the courts, through which conflicts are resolved, the very instruments to foster unresolved causes by reason merely of having failed to render a decision w/In the allotted time.

Legaspi vs. Minister of Finance

Facts: Petitioner maintains that AMENDMENT NO 6 is inoperable. Deleted and/ or repealed by the amendments of April 7, 1981. After April 7 there no longer exists a president (prime minister) but a president and a prime minister. Two different offices cannot be handled by one person Held: Constitution of 1973 has not been in anyway altered or modified much less repealed by constitutional amendments of 1981. Court held that petitioner is laboring under a misconception of facts and of the principles of constitutional construction.

1) Constitutional law is not simply the literal application of the words of the charter. The ancient and familiar rule of constitutional construction that has consistently maintained its intrinsic and transcendental worth is that the meaning and understanding conveyed by the language of any of its provisions do not only portray the influence of current events and developments but likewise the inescapable imperative considerations rooted in historical background and environment at the time of the adoption and thereby caused their being written

2) The BP referred to here is still the interim BP- it follows that its legislative authority

cannot be more exclusive now after the 1981 amendments than when it was originally created in 1976

3) Power that Amendment no 6 vests upon the President (PM) are to be exercised only on two specified occasions a) when in grave emergency (in pres’ judgment) or threat is existing and b) whenever the interim BP pr the regular NA fails to or is unable to act adequately on any matter for any reason that in his judgment requires immediate action----therefore, it is a power that is in its nature of the other powers w/c the constitution directly confers upon the pres or allows to be delegated to him by the Batasan in times of crises and emergencies

4) The power conferred upon the pres thereby was not for Marcos alone but for whoever might be President in the future

Policy Matters & Self-Executing Provisions

State policies, in general, are not self-executory.

They require government action to enforce

them. (e.g. Article II, Section 10 & 13 of Article XII

as decided in the case of Tanada v.Angara)

These policies are to be used by the judiciary as

aids and guides in the exercise of judicial review

and by the legislative in enacting laws.

It is not a cause of action but a justification

*Oposa v. Factoran is an exceptional case because here

the Court ruled that there is an enforceable action for

violation of Section 16, Article II or the right to a balanced

and healthful ecology.

SESSION 10

STATUTORY CONSTRUCTION

Definition and Concept

Construction is the art or process of discovering

and expounding the meaning and intention of

the authors of the law, where that intention is

rendered doubtful by reason of the ambiguity in

its language or of the fact that the given case is

not explicitly provided for by law. (Caltex, Inc. V.

Palomar)

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


direct expressions, or determining the

application of words to facts in litigation.

In practice or common usage, interpretation and

construction are understood as having the same

signification.

Purpose or Object of Construction

To ascertain, and give effect to, the intent of the

law

All rules of construction or interpretation have

for their sole object the ascertainment of the

true intent of the legislature.

The true object of all interpretation is to

ascertain the meaning and will of the law-

making body, to the end that it may be

enforced.

Brought to you by: Amirah Peñalber

AIDS TO CONSTRUCTION

A. In General 1. Concept: where the meaning of a statute is

ambiguous, courts avail of legitimate aids to construction to ascertain the true intent of a statute.

2. Title a. Serves as aid in its language b. May indicate the legislative intent/will to

extend or restrict the scope of the law c. Carries more weight in this jurisdiction because

of the presence of the constitutional requirement that “every bill shall embrace only one subject which shall be expressed in the title thereof”

d. When NOT TO USE: When text of the statute is clear and free from doubt i. Title may be used to remove BUT NOT

CREATE doubt or uncertainty

CASE

Ebarle v. Sucaldito

Issue: whether EO 264 entitled “Outlining the

procedure by which complaints charging government

officials and employees which commission of

irregularities should be guided” applies to criminal

actions, to the end that no preliminary investigation

thereof can be undertaken or information filed in

court unless there is previous compliance with said EO.

Held: EO only applies to administrative, not criminal

complaints.

Title speaks of “commissions of irregularities”,

NO MENTION of “criminal offenses” or “crimes”

while crimes amount to irregularities, the EO

could have very well referred to the more specific

term if it intended to make itself applicable thereto: as

well as use technical terms more applicable to criminal

offenses such as “accused”, “convicted” or “acquitted”

3. Preamble a. Part of the statute written immediately after its

title which states the purpose, reason or justification for the enactment of the law

b. The WHEREAS clauses c. Generally omitted in statutes passed by

Philippine Commission, the Philippine Legislature, the National Assembly, the Congress of the Philippines, and the Batasang Pambansa i. Instead: they used explanatory notes

d. Used extensively in PD’s e. Preamble is not an essential part of a statute

i. Where the meaning of a statute is CLEAR and UNAMBIGUOUS, the preamble can neither expand nor restrict its operation

ii. Neither can it be used for giving a statute an unapparent meaning

f. However, it may be resorted to clarify ambiguity i. It is referred to as the key of the statute: to

open the minds of the lawmakers as to the purpose to be achieved by the statute

g. Sets out intent and thus, may restrict what otherwise appears to be a broad scope of a law

h. May express the legislative intent to make a law apply retroactively

CASE

People vs. Purisima

Person was charged with violation of PD 9, which

penalizes the carrying outside of one’s resident, any

bladed, blunt or pointed weapon not used as a necessary

tool or implement for livelihood

Issue: whether the carrying of such weapon should be in

furtherance of, or in relation to, subversion, rebellion,

insurrection, lawless violence, criminality, chaos or public

disorder, as a necessary element of the crime.

Held: Although there was no express mention of

motivation as an element of the crime, pursuant to the


preamble which spelled out the events that led to the

enactment of the decree namely the state of martial law

in the country (subversion, rebellion, etc were committed

through firearms, explosives and other deadly weapons),

the clear intent and spirit of the decree is to require the

motivation mentioned in the preamble as an

indispensable element of the crime.

4. Context of whole text a. Best source from which to ascertain the

legislative intent is the statute itself: take words, phrases, sentences, section as a whole and in relation to one another

b. It may circumscribe the meaning of a statute: may give a word/phrase a meaning different from its usual or ordinary significance

5. Punctuation marks a. Semi-colon: indicates separation in the

relation of the thought, a degree greater than that expressed by a comma i. What follows a semi-colon must have

a relation to the same matter which precedes it

b. Comma and semi colon both divide sentences and part sentences: do not introduce new ideas

c. Period indicates the end of a sentence d. Rule in using punctuation marks in

statcon: not controlling over intelligible meaning of written words i. Only to used when the latter is

ambiguous ii. Argument based upon punctuation

alone is not persuasive

6. Capitalization of Letters a. Considered an “aid of low degree” in

statcon b. Example:

i. Case where it was contended that employees in the unclassified service of the government are not entitled to security of tenure guaranteed by the Constitution because of the use of the capital letters in the words “Civil Service” and “civil service” in the Civil Service Act indicate that only those pertaining to classified service are protected by the constitutional provision

ii. COURT HELD that there was no difference

7. Headnotes or epigraphs

a. Sections of a statute which provide a convenient index to the contents of its provisions

b. Not granted much weight, inferences drawn therefrom are of little value

8. Lingual Text a. Philippine laws are officially promulgated in

English, Spanish or Filipino or either in 2 such languages

b. Language in which it is written prevails over its transaction

i. RPC originally in Spanish so Spanish over English text

c. Admin Code though: English text shall control unless otherwise specially provided

9. Intent or spirit of the law a. Controlling factor, the “leading star and guiding

light” in application and interpretation b. IF a statute needs construction, the spirit rather

than the letter determines construction c. May be discovered aided by its legislative

history d. If not expressed in some appropriate manner:

the courts cannot speculate or assume intent in no way expressed in the phraseology of the law

10. Policy of Law a. A construction which would carry into effect the

evident policy of the law should be adopted b. Decent respect for the policy of the law must

save the court from imputing to it a self-defeating purpose

11. Purpose of law or mischief to be suppressed a. Purpose or object of the law or the mischief

intended to be removed or suppressed and the causes which induced the enactment of the law are important factors to be considered in its construction

b. More important than grammar and logic c. However, where a statute lays down a general

rule with certain exceptions thereto, the purpose of the general rule is not determinative of the proper construction to be given to the exceptions.

12. Dictionaries a. Where a statute does not define the words or

phrases, nor does its purpose or the context, the courts may consult dictionaries, legal, scientific or general


b. Definitions given by lexicographers are not binding, such definitions are used to support their conclusion

c. Generally define words in their natural, plain and ordinary acceptance and significance

13. Consequences of various construction a. Look to consequences of one construction over

another b. The objective should always be to arrive at a

reasonable and sensible interpretation that is in full accord with legislative intent

B. Legislative History

1. Concept: where there is ambiguity in language and susceptible of several interpretations, best way to ascertain intent is to look at the history of the statute

a. facts which affected its derivation, validity and operation

2. What constitutes legislative history a. Refers to all its antecedents from its inception

until its enactment into law b. President’s message if the bill is enacted in

response thereto, the explanatory note accompanying the bill, committee reports, sponsorship speech…

3. President’s message to legislature a. President’s address or message to Congress at

opening of its regular session usually contains proposed legislative measures

4. Explanatory Note a. Short exposition or explanation accompanying a

proposed legislation by its author or proponent b. Reasons or purpose of the bill

5. Legislative debates, views and deliberations a. Views of legislators during deliberations of a bill

as to bill’s purpose, meaning or effect are not controlling in the interpretation of the law

b. Opinion of one might not be opinion of all

CASE

Song Kiat Chocolate Factory v Central Bank

Main issue is whether cocoa beans may be considered as

“chocolate” for the purpose of exemption from foreign

exchanged tax imposed by RA 601. Court held that

exemption for “chocolate” in the above section 2 does

not include “cocoa beans” – one is raw material, the other

is a manufactured consumer product. Yet, after RA 1197

substituting “cocoa beans” for “chocolate” was approved,

Presidential proclamation 62 stipulates that exemption of

cocoa beans shall operate from and after 3 September

1954

Other parts of Congressional records quoted in briefs

would seem to show that approving RA 1197, agreed

therefrom to exempt “cocoa beans” instead of chocolate

with view to favoring local manufacturers of chocolate

products.

There was a change of legislative policy – not merely a

declaration or clarification of previous Congressional

purpose

Note: The opinions and views expressed by the legislators

during floor deliberations of a bill may not be given

weight at all in any of the following instances: where

there are circumstances indicating a meaning of a statute

other than that expressed by the legislators; where the

views expressed were conflicting; where the intent

deducible from such views is not clear; or where the

statute involved is free from ambiguity.

6. Reports of commissions a. In codification of laws, commissions are usually

formed to compile and collate all laws on a particular subject and prepare the draft of the proposed code

7. Prior laws which statute is based a. Specially applicable in the interpretation of

codes, revised or compiled statutes, for the prior laws which have been codified, compiled or revised will show the legislative history that will clarify the intent

8. Changes in phraseology by amendments a. Change in phraseology by amendment indicates

the legislative intent to change the meaning of the provision from that it originally had

CASE

Francisco v Boiser

Petitioner files for legal redemption of land and RTC

dismisses her petition and contends that based on Art

1623 of the Civil Code, there’s no required form of notice

to inform the co-owners about the sale of property to

enable them to exercise their right of redemption. Thus,

the letter sent by respondent is enough notice and

acknowledgment thereof, as shown in the letters of

petitioner to the tenants dated June 8, should be the time

when the 30-day period for redemption began.


WON the letter is a valid notice as mentioned in Art 1623?

No, notification should come from the vendor, not the

vendee.

The Court argued that Art 1623 clearly requires that the

notification should come from the vendor or prospective

vendor and not from any other person. There is no room

for construction. The difference between art 1623 of the

New CC and Art 1524 of the old CC is that the latter did

not specify who must five notice whereas the former and

the present article expressly says that the notice must be

given by the vendor.

Where the law has been amended, which requires a

particular course of action different from the law prior to

its amendment, effect must be given to changes in

statutory language

9. Amendment by deletion a. Indicates that legislature intended to change

the meaning of the statute, for the presumption is that the legislature would not have made the deletion had the intention been not to effect a change in its meaning.

b. Amended statute should accordingly be given a construction different from that previous to its amendment

c. EXCEPTION: does not apply when the deleted words or phrases are surplusage or when the intention is clear to change the previous meaning of the old law

10. Adopted Statutes a. Foreign statutes which are adopted in this

country or from which local laws are patterned form part of the legislative history of the latter

b. Court decisions from those countries are given great weight in interpretation if found to correspond in fundamental points, at least, with its application in the country

c. LIMIT: if foreign construction is different in some material aspects or if it is clearly erroneous or has not been settled i. Thus, must always turn to intent of

Philippine legislators why they adopted certain law

11. Principles of common law a. Not in force in this country, save only insofar as

it is founded on sound principles applicable to local condition and is not in conflict with existing laws

b. Nevertheless, many of the principles of the common law have been imported into this jurisdiction as a result of the enactment of laws and establishment of institutions similar to Anglo-American jurisprudence

c. HOWEVER: where there is conflict between common law and statutory provision, statutory provision prevails

12. Conditions at the time of enactment a. Statutes do not operate in a vacuum b. Presumed to have taken into account the

existing conditions of things at the time of its enactment

c. Must then consider the physical conditions of the country and circumstances

13. History of the times a. Court may look to the history of the times,

examine the state of things existing when the statute was enacted, and interpret it in light of the conditions obtaining

b. Law being a manifestation of social culture and progress must be interpreted taking into consideration the stage of such culture and progress including all the concomitant circumstances.

C. Contemporary Construction

1. Concept: a. Constructions placed upon statutes at the time

of, or after, their enactment by the executive, legislature or judicial authorities, as well as by those who, because of their involvement in the process of legislation, are knowledgeable of the intent and purpose of the law, such as draftsmen and bill sponsors.

b. Invaluable aid: strongest in the law

2. Executive Construction a. Construction placed upon a statute by an

executive or administrative officer called upon to execute or administer such statute

b. Such officials generally are the very first officials to interpret the law, preparatory to its enforcement

c. 3 types i. by an executive or administrative officer

directly called to implement law: express or implied, circular

ii. by Secretary of Justice in his capacity as the chief legal adviser of the government: opinions

1. president may modify, alter or reverse this


iii. ruling by an executive officer exercising quasi-judicial power

3. Weight a. Contemporaneous construction is very probably

the true expression of the legislative purpose, especially if the construction is followed for a considerable period of time

b. Weight awarded to particular construction increases as the period in which it is followed and observed lengthens and its acceptability widens

CASE

Nestle Philippines, Inc v CA

Petitioners claim that “issuance of additional capital stock

of a corporation sold or distributed by it among its own

stockholder exclusively, where no commission or

remuneration is paid or given directly or indirectly in

connection with the sale or distribution of such increased

capital stock” is exempt from registration requirement.

Nestle alleges that that “increased capital stock” in said

provision should be interpreted as distribution of an

increased authorized capital stock or the issuance of

unissued capital stock.

SEC and CA ruled that the proposed issuance does not fall

in Sec 6 (a) 4 and that this provision is applicable only to

increase in authorized capital stock of a corporation.

Should the SEC definition be upheld? Yes.

The Court stressed the principle of contemporaneous

construction where the construction given to a stature by

an administrative agency charged with interpretation and

application of that statute should be entitled respect and

accorded great weight by the court unless such

construction is in conflict with the governing statute or to

the Constitution.

The rationale for the rule relates not only to the

mergence of the multifarious needs of a modern or

modernizing society and the establishment of diverse

administrative agencies for addressing and satisfying

those needs; it also relates to the accumulation of

experience and growth of specialized capabilities by the

administrative agency charged with implementing a

particular statute. The court stressed that executive

officials are presumed to have familiarized themselves

with all the considerations pertinent to the meaning and

purpose of the law.

CASE

Philippine Scout Veterans v NLRC

Petitioner assails that private respondent was not entitled

to retirement pay since there was no company policy

which provided for nor any collective bargaining

agreement granting it. Respondent assails that the labor

code authorize the payment of retirement pay in absence

of provision thereof. RA 7641, an amendment to the labor

code entitling for retirement pay was passed years after

the retirement of private respondent. Court held that

private respondent was not entitled to retirement pay

due to lack of consensual and statutory basis of the grant.

RA 7641 cannot be applied since he retired prior to its

enactment. It is the rule of statutory construction that all

statutes are to be construed as having only a prospective

operation unless the purpose of Legislature to give them

retrospective effect is expressly declared/ necessarily

implied from language used.

D. Statutory Directives 1. RA 6938, sec. 126 (1990): AN ACT TO ORDAIN A

COOPERATIVE CODE OF THE PHILIPPINES

Art. 126. Interpretation and Construction. - In case of

doubt as to the meaning of any provision of this Code

or the regulations issued in pursuance thereof, the

same shall be resolved liberally in favor of the

cooperatives and their members.

2. RA 8792, sec. 37 (2000); ELECTRONIC COMMERCE ACT

Section 37. Statutory Interpretation. – Unless

otherwise expressly provided for, the interpretation

of this Act shall give due regard to its international

origin and the need to promote uniformity in its

application and the observance of good faith in

international trade relations. The generally accepted

principles of international law and convention and

electronic commerce shall likewise be considered.

3. RA 9285, secs. 8, 20, 25 (2004); Alternative Dispute Resolution Act of 2004

SEC. 8. Application and Interpretation. - In applying

construing the provisions of this Chapter, consideration

must be given to the need to promote candor or parties

and mediators through confidentiality of the mediation

process, the policy of fostering prompt, economical, and


amicable resolution of disputes in accordance with the

principles of integrity of determination by the parties, and

the policy that the decision-making authority in the

mediation process rests with the parties.

SEC. 20. Interpretation of Model Law. - In interpreting

the Model Law, regard shall be had to its international

origin and to the need for uniformity in its interpretation

and resort may be made to the travaux preparatories and

the report of the Secretary General of the United Nations

Commission on International Trade Law dated March 25,

1985 entitled, "International Commercial Arbitration:

Analytical Commentary on Draft Trade identified by

reference number A/CN. 9/264."

SEC. 25. Interpretation of the Act. - In interpreting the

Act, the court shall have due regard to the policy of the

law in favor of arbitration. Where action is commenced by

or against multiple parties, one or more of whom are

parties who are bound by the arbitration agreement

although the civil action may continue as to those who

are not bound by such arbitration agreement.

CASE

Valderama v. NLRC

Saavedra was terminated allegedly due to redindancy but

the Court ruled that it was actually due to pregnancy.

Officers refuse to pay liabilities alleging that the

corporation is solely liable.

WON the decision, after it had become final and

executory, may still be changed to include officers of

COMMODEX among parties liable to Saavedra YES

The rule that once a judgment becomes final and

executor it can no longer be disturbed, altered or

modified is not an inflexible one. It admits of exceptions,

as where the facts and circumstances transpire after a

judgment has become final which render its execution

impossible or unjust.

In such a case, interested party may cause for its

modification to harmonize it with justice and facts.

It is well settled that to get the true intent and meaning of

the decision, no specific portion thereof should be resorted

to but the same must be considered in its entirety.

INTERPRETATION OF WORDS AND PHRASES

A. In General 1. Concept:

a. A word or phrase used in a statute may have ordinary, generic, restricted, technical, legal, commercial or trade meaning. It may be been defined in the statute itself, or may have previously received a judicial construction.

b. Legislative definition is given the greatest weight

c. In the absence of legislative definition, the general rule is that: they should be given their plain ordinary, and common usage meaning; considered in their natural, ordinary, commonly accepted and most obvious signification

d. Generalia verba sunt generaliter intelligenda: what is generally spoken shall be generally understood or general words shall be understood in a general sense

e. Generale dictum generaliter est interpretandum: a general statement is understood in a general sense

2. Words with commercial or trade meaning a. Words and phrases, which are in common

use among merchants and traders, acquire trade or commercial meanings which are generally accepted in the community in which they have been in common use.

3. Words with technical or legal meaning a. As a rule, words that have, or have been

used in, a technical sense or those that have been judicially construed to have a certain meaning should be interpreted according to the sense in which they have been previously used, although the sense may vary from the strict or literal meaning of the words.

CASE

Mataguina Integrated Wood Products, Inc vs. CA

Mataguina establishes sole proprietorship and later

incorporates MIWPI. She incurred liability under activities

performed of her sole proprietorship business. Shall the

obligation be transferred onto MIWPI?

RESPONDENTS cite to establish succession of liability:

Sec 61 PD 705: “the transferee shall assume all the

obligations of the transferor”

But: must look to the spirit of the law and intent of

legislature and not the letter of the law

In construing statues, the terms used therein are

GENERALLY to be given their ordinary meaning i.e. such

meaning ascribed to them when they are commonly used


Thus: “obligations” is contrued to mean obligations

incurred by transferor in the ordinary course of business

not those incurred as a result of transgressions

Also, in the letter approving Mataguina’s request for

change of name and transfer of mgt, it states: “MIWPI

shall assume the resp of paying whatever pending

liabilities remaining unsettled by MLE with the gov’t”

- This includes: Forestry Charges, Taxes, Fees and similar

accountabilities

Tan v. People

The Forestry Reform Code only prohibits the illegal

possession of timber and other forest products, not

lumber, per se. Petitioner claims that law makes a

distinction between lumber and timber

Should lumber be included in the terms timber and

forest products? YES

Absent express legislative intent, words and phrases in a

statute should be given their plain, ordinary and common

usage meaning.

The Forestry Reform Code does not contain a definition of

either timber or lumber. But it is understood that Lumber

is commonly defined as processed log or timber. And

when the law prohibited the illegal possession of timber,

it did not distinguish whether this should be

raw/processed timber.

To construe “sawn lumber” as not covered by “sawn

timber” would defeat the purpose and evident intent of

the law.

CASE

Bernardo v. Bernardo

Section 1 of the Commonwealth Act No. 539. The said act

authorizes the expropriation or purchase of private lands

and that lands acquired thereunder should be subdivided

into lots, for resale at reasonable prices to their “bona

fide tenants or occupants.”

Who shall be given preferential right, the “bona fide

occupants” (respondents) of the “actual occupants”

(petitioners)?

The term “bona fide occupant” had been defined in

previous cases as:

-One who supposes he has a good title and knows of no

adverse claim

-One who not only honestly supposes himself to be

vested with true title but is ignorant that the title is

contested by any other person claiming a superior right to

it.

The essence of the bona fides or good faith, therefore,

lies in honest belief in the validity of one’s right, ignorance

of a superior claim, and absence of intention to overreach

another. The petitioner falls short of this standard.

The intent of the law, in preferring “bona fide occupants”,

is to protect or sanction such utter disregard of fair

dealing may well be doubted.

Sec 7 of Act 1170 of the Old Philippine Legislature,

employs the terms “actual bona fide settlers and

occupants” plainly indicating that “actual” and “bona

fide” are not synonymous, while the Commonwealth acts

deleted the term “actual” and solely used the words

“bona fide occupants” thereby emphasizing that the

prospective beneficiaries of the acts should be endowed

with legitimate tenure.

In carrying out its social readjustment policies, the

government could not simply lay aside moral standards,

and aim to favor usurpers, squatters, and intruders,

unmindful of the lawful or unlawful origin and character

of their occupancy. The term “bona fide occupants” was

not designed to cloak and protect violence, strategy,

double dealing, or breach of trust.

Malanyaon v Lising

Mayor Pontanal was accused of violating the Anti-Graft

and Corrupt Practices Act. During the pendency of the

case, he was suspended from office. Law states that if said

public officer is convicted by final judgment, he will lose

all retirement/gratuity benefits. If he is acquitted, he will

be entitled to reinstatement to salaries and benefits

which he didn’t receive during the suspension period.

During the pendency of the criminal case, he died. The

municipal treasurer disbursed P5000 in favor of the

widow of Mayor Ponantal. Petitioner contends this is

illegal disbursement.

Does the dismissal of a case against a suspended officer

amount to an acquittal? No

Dismissal is not acquittal, as generally understood

-When the law speaks of the suspended officer being

“acquitted”, it means that after due hearing, the court


finds that the evidence does not show the guilt of the

accused is beyond reasonable doubt.

- An acquittal is based on the merits of the case. But a

dismissal does not decide on the merits of the case or

that the defendant is not guilty. Dismissal terminates the

proceeding either because the court is not of competent

jurisdiction or the offense committed is outside its

jurisdiction or the complaint is not valid.

Brought to you by: Mica Peña


ASSOCIATED WORDS

In general:

- The meaning of words and phrases in a statute

depends upon what the legislature intended.

- The task of statutory construction primarily

involves ascertaining of legislative intent,

secondarily, construction from extraneous and

relevant circumstances.

- Legislative definition of the word and phrases in

the law itself or previous judicial construction

should also be considered in the interpretation.

1. Noscitur a sociis

Key: construe words based on their usage in the statute

as a whole

“Where a particular word or phrase is ambiguous in itself

and is equally susceptible of various meanings, its correct

transaction may be made clear and specific by considering

the company of words which it is associated.” (Aisporna

vs. CA)

- (Agpalo) When the law does not define the word,

it is to be construed as having similar meaning to

that of the words associated with or

accompanied by it

- Thus, if in the law, the words associated with the

word in question is construed generally or

technically, the latter will be interpreted similarly

- (Sir Molo) find a unifying element in the statute

and apply that element to the word in question

- The construction is RESTRICTIVE as the

interpretation is ONLY based on the contents of

the statute

Illustration:

Aisporna vs. CA

F: Aisporna (A) is an insurance agent. His wife (W)

solicited an insurance application from a client. W is

accused of violating the insurance law that agents have to

register first before doing acts of an insurance agent (but

without compensation).

H: The word agent must be construed in relation to the

words associated with it in the entire provision. In this

case, para 1 of sec 189 talks about the prohibition against

unregistered persons conducting acts reserved only for

registered agents (the lower court ONLY used this part in

convicting W). Para 3 talks about the penalty. But para 2

defines what an insurance agent is and states that the

acts he or she conducted must be for compensation.

Agent must be interpreted in light of this paragraph, thus,

W did not violate this law for she did not accept any

compensation in the solicitation and merely acted to

assist A.

Dai-ichi vs. Villarama

F: Villarama (V) is a former employee of Dai-ichi (D). He

allegedly violated their contract that prohibits him from

working in a similar company in two years after his

resignation. D filed for an action for damages. RTC says it

has no jurisdiction and that case should be handled by the

Labor arbiter as the issue is a claim for money damages

based on Art 217 of the Labor Code.

H: Money damages in Art 217 do not pertain to ALL

money damages employees might claim against

employers (or vice versa). The kind of damages in art 217

only includes those arising from employee-employer

relations. If the entire art 217 is construed, all the actions

arise from employee-employer relations only. Regular

courts have jurisdiction in this case because the action did

not arise from employee-employer relations.

Note: Sir M said the Court the line here is vague and that

there is judicial legislation in this decision. The criteria for

employee-employer relations is subjective.

2. Ejusdem Generis

Key: Enumeration + catch all provision

“Where a general word or phrase (i.e. catch-all word)

follows an enumeration of particular and specific words of

the same class, or where the latter follows the former, the

general word or phrase is to be construed to include or to

be restricted to persons, things or cases akin to,

resembling, or of the same kind or class as those

specifically mentioned.” (PBA vs. CA)

- (Agpalo) The rationale for this statcon rule is to

give effect to both the particular and the general

words, by treating the particular words as

indicating the class and the general words as

indicating all that is embraced in said class

although not specifically named in the

enumeration.

- Requisites of Ejusdem Generis:

a. The statute contains an ENUMERATION of

particular or specific words, followed by a

general word (e.g. and the like)


b. The particular words constitute a class

(there is a discernable relationship among

the words)

c. The enumeration is not exhaustive or is not

merely examples

d. There is no other indication to give the

general word a broader meaning

- Corollary, ejusdem generis does not apply if

there is no distinguishable common

characteristic among the words or if the list of

specific words is exhaustive to its class

- (Sir Molo) In applying ejusdem, look for the

enumeration and the catch-all phrase

- This statcon rule is EXPANSIVE as the phrase in

question covers words even those not found in

the statute itself (remember that noscitur is

restrictive, only in the statute)

- Look for the thing or characteristic that ties the

enumeration together, or the relationship

Illustration:

PBA vs. CA

F: PBA is claiming that it should pay a local tax and not a

national tax because basketball is a form of amusement

which is covered by the local government. PBA cites the

local tax code which says that taxes to admission to

“theatres, cinematographs, circuses and other places of

amusement” should be levied by the local government.

H: Basketball is not included in the general word “other

places of amusement.” The law shows that all the

particular words enumerated are forms of artistic

entertainment or expression. Basketball is a form of

sports.

Magtajas vs. Pryce

F: Magtajas is claiming that the casino Pagcor wants to

establish in their place is an illegal form of gambling and is

prohibited based on the local government code. He cited

the sec 458 of the LGC which prohibits “gambling and

other prohibited games of chance”.

H: The Court said that the law only prohibits illegal forms

of gambling. Obviously, the law does not include games

which are not prohibited and in fact permitted by law.

Pagcor is an exception because it is a legal form of

gambling.

3. Expressio unius est exclusio alterius

Key: limited enumeration (no catch-all)

“Where a statute, by its terms, is expressly limited to

certain matters, it may not, by interpretation or

construction, be extended to other matters.” (Centeno vs.

Villalon)

- (Agpalo) The express mention of one person,

thing or consequence implies the exclusion of all

others.

- One variation is the principle that what is

expressed puts an end to that which is implied.

- Another variation is that the expression of one or

more things of a class implies the exclusion of all

not expressed, even though all would have been

implied had none been expressly mentioned.

- It is different with ejusdem although both

include enumerations. In ejusdem, there is a

general word which may be used to include

other words outside the statute granted that it is

of the same nature to those particular words

enumerated. In expressio, the express mention

of particular words excludes others.

Ratio: the Legislature wouldn’t have provided an

enumeration had the intention been not to

restrict its meaning to those expressly

mentioned.

- (Sir Molo) This is a RESTRICTIVE rule and justifies

the exlusion of an object not included in a list.

There is no catch-all provision here.

Illustration:

Centeno vs. Villalon-Pornillos

F: C is a member of a group of elderly who wanted to start

the renovation of a church in their community. He

solicited money from A, a judge. A accused him of

violationg PD 1564 which requires a permit from DSWD

before one can solicit contributions for “charitable and

public welfare purposes”.

H: The Court held that religious purposes, such as in this

case, is not included in the charitable purposes of PD

1564. Although there is no enumeration in the law, the

Court used the rule Expressio unius est exclusio alterius. It

states that where a statute, by its terms, is expressly

limited to certain matters, it may not, by interpretation or

construction, be extended to others. This rule means that

the legislature would not have made specified

enumerations in a statute had the intention been not to

restrict its meaning and to confine its terms to those

mentioned. Although there is no enumeration PD 1564


itself, the Court cited the enumeration in the 1987

Constitution, Section 28 (3), Art VI showing that the terms

religious and charitable are dissociated and individually

mentioned. The Court also cited various laws where both

terms are spelled out in the enumeration showing the

Legislature’s intention to dissociate the two terms and

that they are not synonymous. The Court also argued that

while religious purposes may be charitable, not all

charitable purposes are religious.

Note: Sir M disagreed in the application of expression

unius in this case because there is no enumeration. If it

can be applied this way, that is by citing other laws with

enumeration, then it can apply to everything. Other rules,

such as noscitur, could have been used.

Malinias vs. COMELEC

F: M was a candidate for governor in Mountain Province.

He filed a criminal complaint against C (Mt. Province PNP

Director) and T (chief of police of Bontoc, Mt. Province)

for violating Section 232 of BP881 or the Omnibus

Election Code. Said section prohibits members of the

police force or armed forces from going within the 50

meter radius of the canvassing room. C and T impliedly

admitted going within that prohibited area.

H: The Court said that C and T cannot be held criminally

under Sec 232 of BP 881 because it is not one of the

elections offenses explicitly enumerated in Sec 261 and

262 of the same law. While it is unlawful for said persons

to enter the canvassing room, they cannot be criminally

liable because the provision is not a criminal offense. By

applying the rule of Expressio unius est exclusio alterius,

there is no ground for Comelec to punish the two because

the legal basis used by M is a non-criminal act. This is

without prejudice to an administrative complaint that

may be charged against them.

4. Dissimulum dissmilis est ratio

Key: facts allow distinction

“Where the facts and circumstances show that the

legislature intended a distinction of qualification, the

Courts may distinguish. Of things dissimilar, the rule must

be dissimilar.” (Garvida vs. Sales, Jr.)

- (Sir Molo) One can distinguish even if the law

does not, as long as the facts allow one to do so.

- In Garvida, the factual distinction is between a

member and an officer. There should be a

difference in qualification as to age so that SK

officials are not immediately removed from

office right after they are elected.

Illustration:

Garvida vs. Sales

F: Petitioner G registered as a voter for the Sangguniang

Kabataan and member of the Katipunan ng Kabataan

when she was 21 years old and 9 months. Subsequently,

she filed a certicate of candidacy as SK chair. On the day

of the election, she was 21 years and 11 months old.

H: The Court said that G is no longer eligible to run for the

SK. It is explicitly required that a candidate should be 21

years old (i.e. 21 cycles of 365 days and not 21 and 1 day,)

on the day of the election. The law distinguished between

the requirements for being a KK member and SK officer

(i.e. in KK, the person should be 21 years old, for SK, the

person should be 21 years old ON THE DAY OF THE

ELECTION). It is the intent of the legislature to impose a

stricter qualification for the SK to ensure that they truly

represent their constituent by being in the same age

bracket. Dissimulum dissimilis est ratio is used, of things

dissimilar, the rule should be dissimilar!

5. Casus omissus

Key: two laws; words are omitted in old law

“A person, object or thing omitted from an enumeration

in a statute must be held to have been omitted

intentionally.”

- (Agpalo) This is based on the principle that there

is a reasonable certainty that the legislature

intentionally omitted something from the

enumeration.

- But if the legislative intent to omit is not clearly

indicated, the court may supply the omission if to

do so will carry out the clear intent of the law.

- (Sir Molo) There should be two related laws. The

new law is not necessarily a direct reproduction

of the old law. They can be entirely different

laws, as long as there are provisions covering

similar subject.

- If something is omitted in the new law, what is

no longer there is intentionally omitted from the

previous law.

Illustration:

COA vs. Province of Cebu

F: The Provincial Board of Education established extension

classes in public schools and teachers with no items in the


DECS plantilla shall handle them. The expenses for the

extension classes and the salary for the teachers were

taken from the Special Education Fund (SEF) pursuant to

RA 5447. Scholarship grants for students also came from

the SEF.

The Commission on Audit opposes the

appropriation of the teachers’ salaries from the SEF. They

claim that the Local Government Code (Sec. 235, 272,

100c) repealed RA 5447 and now governs the SEF.

H: The salary for the teachers in the extension classes is

included in the clause in Sec 100(c) of the LGC about the

“establishment and maintenance of extension classes.”

The hiring of teachers and payment of their salaries are

necessary implication of the establishment of extension

classes.

However, the granting of scholarship funds from the

SEF was not included in the provision of the LGC

governing the SEF. Unlike RA 5447 which explicitly states

that the SEF may be used in the “granting of government

scholarship to poor but deserving students”, it was

omitted in the pertinent provisions of the LGC. In applying

the rule Casus omissus pro omission habendus or what

has been omitted from the law was omitted intentionally,

the SEF now cannot be used to grant scholarship

privileges. The Court said that the legislature intended to

omit that provision and it is not for the Court to supply

what had been omitted by the legislature. The doctrine of

necessary implication cannot apply in this case because

the scholarship grant is not necessary and indispensable

in the operation and maintenance of public schools.

6. Ubi lex non distinguit nee nos distinguere

debemos

Key: no distinction (general words with general meaning

e.g. other benefits, any person)

“Where the law does not distinguish, courts should not

distinguish.”

- (Agpalo) Ratio: general words and phrases

should be accorded their natural and general

significance. They should not be reduced into

parts and one part distinguished from the other

so as to justify its exclusion from the operation of

the law.

- Law should be administered not as the courts

think it ought to be but as they find it and

without regard to consequences. The assumption

is that the legislature did not distinguish because

it did not intent to.

- Simple example: in the case of Guerrero vs.

Comelec, petitioners aver that “qualification” on

Art VI, sec 17 of the constitution pertains to

constitutional qualifications only and not

beyond. The Court said the word “qualifications”

cannot be further qualified with the term

“constitutional.” Because firstly, the framers of

the constitution must have intended no

distinction at all. Secondly, the law can only

distinguish if there are facts and circumstances

showing that the lawgiver intended a distinction

or qualification (sounds like dissimulum? yes).

- (Sir Molo) Different in dissimulum because while

there is a no distinction, the facts allow the

courts to distinguish. In Ubi lex, the text does not

allow any distinction. In both cases, look at the

text first (in dissimulum, distinctions may be

allowed)

Sir M example:

Law: Students from public schools are suspended during

Storm Signal #2.

- If dissimulum is used, college students from

public schools will not be allowed because there

is a factual distinction between them and

high/grade school students (i.e. college students

can still come to school despite heavy rains of

#2)

- If ubi lex is used, there is no distinction so classes

of college students from public schools are also

suspended.

- Note that there is no right answer, everything

will depend on the proper reasoning!

Illustration:

Cebu Institute of Medicine vs. CIMEU-NFL

F: P (CIM) charged its employees’ SSS, Medicare and Pag-

ibig premiums against the 70% incremental tuition fee

increase under RA 6728 (or the Government Assistance to

Students and Teachers in Private Education Act). Sec 5,

para 2 of the law says that “70% of the tuition fee

increases shall go to payment of salaries, wages,

allowances and other benefits of teaching and non-

teaching personnel.” R (CIMEU-NFL) claims that P cannot

charge the premiums from the supposed compensation of

employees.

H: The Court applied the rule Ubi lex non distinguit nee

nos distinguere debemos or where the law does not

distinguish, the courts should not distinguish in holding


that the said premiums are integrated in the amount

allocated to “other benefits” from the 70% incremental

tuition fee increase. The 70% is not to be delivered wholly

to the employees but will come in the form of SSS,

Medicare and Pag-ibig premiums. The schools has the

discretion to dispose of this amount or the kind and

amount of allowances and benefits to give the employees.

Ramirez vs. CA

F: Petitioner (P) produced a recorded conversation while

respondent (R) was harshly reprimanding her. P, using the

tape, filed a claim for moral damages. R filed a separate

criminal case based on anti-wiretapping law. CA ruled in

favour of R (upholding the violation of the anti-

wiretapping law). P appealed to the Supreme Court.

H: Court affirmed CA decision. The anti-wiretapping law

applies to “any person who records a communication”

regardless of whether he or she was a third party to the

conversation or a party to the conversation. As long as

NOT all parties to the conversation give consent to the

recording, it is illegal. In this case, the Court did not

accept P’s contention that she should be absolved in

recording the conversation because she was a party to it.

7. Reddendo singular singulis

Literal Meaning: Referring each to each

“Antecedents and consequences should be read

distributively to the effect that each word is to be applied

to the subject to which it appears by context most

appropriately applicable.”

- (Agpalo) This is a variation of the last antecedent

rule where words or phrases must only be

applied to modify or qualify those immediate to

them, and not to the words remotely located

from them. In the case of reddendo, words are

taken distributively and do not necessarily apply

to the words or terms closely associated with it.

- (Sir Molo) The basis for distributing words or the

justification for the allocation is the factual

circumstances. (e.g. in Amadora, the distribution

is justified by the historical background of

academic and technical schools. In academic

schools, the teachers are known to be closer

than students than the heads of the institution.)

- This is an EXPANSIVE rule.

Illustration:

People vs. Tamani

F: The issue raised is when to count the 15-day period

within which to appeal a judgment of conviction in a

criminal action—whether from the date of promulgation

of judgment of from the date of receipt of the notice of

judgment. Section 6, Rule 122 of the Rules of Court

provides that “an appeal must be taken 15 days from the

promulgation or notice of the judgment or order

appealed from.”

D: By applying Reddendo singular singulis, the Court held

that the 15 day period should be counted from the

promulgation and not from the receipt of copy of

judgment. The Court said that the word “promulgation”

should refer to judgment and the word “notice” should

refer to order.

Amadora vs. CA

F: Petitioners (Ps) are the parents of A who was killed by

D. A was supposed to submit his physics project before

the graduation when he was shot inside the auditorium.

Ps filed a suit against A’s school and teacher for damages

invoking Civil Code Article 2180 which said that “teachers

or heads of establishments of arts and trade shall be liable

for damages caused by their pupils and students or

apprentices so long as they remain in custody.”

D: The Court explained Art 2180. It used the stacon rule

Reddendo singular singulis in ruling that where the

schools is academic rather than technical or vocational in

nature, responsibility for the tort committed by the

student will attach to the teacher in charge of such

student. This is the general rule. In the case of

establishments of arts and trades, it is the head thereof,

and only he, who shall be liable. Following the rule,

teachers will apply to students and pupils, while heads of

establishments will apply to apprentices.

In this case, only the teacher should have been

liable. But because it wasn’t shown that it was his

negligence that led to A’s death, he was not held liable.

Note: Sir M asked about the legal basis for the

interpretation (e.g. teacher to pupils etc). First, the basis is

the law. Next, look at the context or circumstances

(factual or historical circumstances justified the

allocation).

8. Doctrine of Necessary Implication

(No discussion in Agpalo’s book)


Illustration:

NATU vs. Torres and Republic Planters Bank

F: Petitioner NATU (P) wanted to have an election for the

bargaining representative among supervisory employees

of respondent bank (R). The employees that P submit to

join the election includes the positions of branch

mangers/OIC, controllers and cashiers. R claims that these

employees are not supervisory but managerial/

confidential employees who are prohibited from joining a

union.

H: Branch managers, controllers and cashiers are NOT

managerial employees. Managerial employees are those

who create (not merely execute) policies and have the

power to fire and hire employees. They are merely

supervisory employees who execute policies and who

have recommendatory powers. BUT! They are

confidential employees who have access to confidential

information in the company. By using the doctrine of

necessary implication, confidential employees should also

be prohibited from joining a union (even if it is not

expressly provided in the law). The same rationale will

apply—they will only act as representative of the

company and not the employees. Also, this will be

detrimental to the company because these employees

have access to confidential information which may be

used against them during the bargaining!

Provisos, Exceptions and Savings Clauses

Provisos

– the role of a provision is either to limit the

application of the enacting clause, section or

provision of a statute

– It may also qualify or restrain its generality or to

exclude some possible ground for

misinterpretation as extending to cases not

intended by the legislature

– It is commonly found at the end of a session and

introduced, as a rule, by the word “Provided,”

(although provisos need not start with this)

– The general rule is that a proviso only qualifies or

modifies the phrase immediately preceding it, it

should not be construed to apply to other

sections or to the entire stature itself.

Exceptions

- Consists of that which would otherwise be

included in the provision from but was excepted

- It exempts something from the operation of the

law by express words

- Generally expressed through words like except,

otherwise, shall not apply etc (although,, an

exception need not be necessarily introduced by

these terms)

- An exception confirms the general rule. It

expressly excludes things from the law’s

operation and corollary, those not enumerated

in the exceptions are deemed to be included in

the general rule

Proviso vs. Exception

- An exception exempts something absolutely

while a proviso defeats the operation

conditionally (not really sure what the latter

means )

- An exception takes out of the statute something

that would otherwise be a part of the subject of

the law while a proviso avoids them by way of

defeasance or excuse

Saving clause

- Operates to except from the effect of the law or

to save something that would otherwise be lost

- Usually used to save something from the effect

of a repeal of a law

- For example, if a procedural law is repealed,

there may be a saving clause saying that

proceedings pending under the old law at the

time the new law takes effect are saved or shall

still apply the old law

Brought to you by Cielo Marjorie Goño

CONSTRUCTION OF STATUTE AS A WHOLE

Statute Construed as a Whole

Statute is passed as a whole and by one general purpose and intent. Thus, each part or section should be construed in connection with every other part and section to produce a HARMONIOUS WHOLE.

WHY? Dangerous to construe only a part of a section since one portion may be qualified by the other portion.

Every part of the statute must be interpreted with reference to the statute

Intent ascertained from statute as a whole


Intent or the meaning of a statute should be ascertained from the statute taken as a whole and not from an isolated part of the provision thereof.

Legislative meaning is to be extracted from statute as a whole – clauses are not to be segregated, but every part of statute is to be construed with reference to every other part and every word and phrase in connection with its context because the law is the best expositor of itself.

Optima interpretatrix est ipsum statutum – the best interpreter of a statute is the statute itself.

In proper interpretation of statutes, it is not permissible to inquire into the motives which influenced the legislative body, except insofar as such motives are disclosed by the statute itself.

Purpose or context as controlling guide

Statute must receive such reasonable construction as will, if possible, make all its parts harmonize with each other, and render them consistent with its scope and object

Giving effect to statute as a whole

One part is as important as the other; thus, statute must be construed and given effect as a whole

Every part of a statute should be given effect because a statute is enacted as an integrated measure and not a hodgepodge of conflicting provisions.

RULE: ut res magis valeat quam pareat – construction is to be sought which gives effect to the whole of the statute: it’s every word.

Where a statute is susceptible of more than one interpretation, the court should adopt such reasonable and beneficial construction as will render th provision thereof operative and effective and harmonious with each other.

Where there is a particular or special provision and a general provision in the same statute and the latter in its most comprehensive sense would overrule the former, the particular or special provision is construed as an exception to the general provision.

Law should be interpreted with a view to upholding rather than destroying it (Interpretatio fienda est ut res magis valeat quam pereat)

Presumption: Legislature has enacted a statute whose provisions are in harmony and consistent with each other and that conflicting intentions in the same statute are never supposed or regarded. Law enacted is complete by itself, that the legislature did perform its function well and that it intended to impart to its enactment such a meaning as will render it operative and effective.

Where absolute harmony between parts of a statute is demonstrably not possible, the court must reject that one which is lease in accord with the general plan of the whole statute

In case of irreconcilable conflict between two provisions of the same statute, the last in order of position is frequently held to prevail unless it clearly appears that the intent of the legislature is otherwise

The circumstances of their passage, among other aids to construction, should also be inquired into to determine which should prevail

JMM Promotions & Management, Inc. v. NLRC

Facts: Involved are 3 provisions of POEA rules:

(1) provision which requires cash or surety bond as a requirement for perfecting an appeal;

(2) provision which requires cash bond and surety bond to answer for all valid and legal claims against the employer;

(3) provision which requires amount to be placed in escrow to answer for claims of recruited workers.

It is claimed that the appeal cash or surety bond should

not be required for perfection of appeal from a decision

of the POEA because the recruitment agency has already

posted bonds and escrow money.

Held: Court rejected contention. “Under the petitioner’s

interpretation, the appeal bond required by Section 6 of

the aforementioned POEA Rule should be disregarded

because of the earlier bonds and escrow money it has

posted. The petitioner would in effect nullify Section 6 as

a superfluity but we do not see any such redundancy; on

the contrary, we find that Section 6 complements

Sections 4 and 17. The rule is that a construction that

would render provision inoperative should be avoided;

instead, apparently inconsistent provisions should be

reconciled whenever possible as parts of a coordinated

and harmonious whole.

SAJONAS v. CA

Facts: Involves the issue as to what period an adverse

claim annotated at the back of a transfer certificate of

title is effective, which in turn depends upon the

interpretation of Sec. 70 of P.D. 1529, which reads in part:

“The adverse claim shall be effective for a period of thirty

days from the date of registration. After the lapse of said

period, annotation of adverse claim may be cancelled

upon filing of a verified petition therefor by the party in


interest: Provided, that after cancellation, no second

adverse claim based on the same ground shall be

registered by the same claimant.

Held: the effectivity of a duly annotated adverse claim

does not lapse after 30 days but continues until cancelled

by the court in a verified petition filed for the purpose,

the Court applied the rules of statutory construction.

THUS, “in construing the law aforesaid, care should be

taken that every part thereof be given effect and a

construction that could render a provision inoperative

should be avoided, and inconsistent provisions should be

reconciled whenever possible as parts of a harmonious

whole. For taken in solitude, a word or phrase might

easily convey a meaning quite different from the one

actually intended and evident when a word or phrase is

considered with those with which it is associated. In

ascertaining the period of effectivity of an inscription of

an adverse claim, we must read the law in its entirety.

CONSTRUCTION IN RELATION TO OTHER STATUTES

Statute should be construed in harmony with, and not in violation of, the fundamental law. Legislature presumed to have adhered to the constitutional limitations.

If there is doubt or uncertainty as to the meaning of the legislature, that interpretation will be adopted which will avoid the effect of unconstitutionality, even though it may be necessary, for this purpose, to disregard the more usual or apparent import of the language employed. However, court cannot, in order to bring a statute within the fundamental law, amend it by construction.

Statutes in pari materia

o When they relate to the same person or thing, or have the same purpose or object, or cover the same specific or particular subject matter

o Statute should be so construed not only to be consistent with itself but also to harmonize with other laws on the same subject matter as to form a complete, coherent and intelligible system

o Interpretare et concordare leges legibus est optimus interpretandi modus = best methodi of interpretation is that which makes laws consistent with other laws; every statute must be so construed and harmonized with other statutes as to form a uniform system of jurisprudence

o Distingue tempora et concordabis jura = distinguish times and you will harmonize laws

o Presumption: all laws are consistent with each other o Assumption: Whenever the legislature enacts a law, it

has in mind the previous statutes relating to the same subject matter, and in the absence of any express repeal or amendment, the new statute is deemed enacted in accord with the legislative policy embodied in those prior statutes. Later statutes are supplementary or complimentary to the earlier enactments.

o Question is whether the later act has impliedly amended or repealed the earlier statute. In case of doubt, the doubt will be resolved against implied amendment or repeal and in favor of harmonization of all the laws on the subject.

o Statute will not be construed as repealing a prior act on the same subject in the absence of words to that effect unless there is an irreconcilable repugnancy between them or unless the new law is evidently intended to supersede all prior acts on the matter and to comprise itself the sole and complete system of legislation on the subject

General and special statutes

o General – one which embraces a class of subjects or places and does not omit any subject or place naturally belonging to such class; one of universal application affecting the entire community

o Special – one which relates to particular persons or things of a class or to a particular portion or section of the state only

o Fact that one law is special and the other general creates a presumption that the special act is to be considered as remaining an exception of the general act, one as a general law of the land and the other as the law of the particular case; period when the special law was passed is irrelevant

o Where two statutes are of equal theoretical application to a particular case, the one designed therefor specially should prevail

o Reason: Legislature in passing a law of special character has its attention directed to the special facts and circumstances which the special act is intended to meet

o Presumption: General law refers to the subject in general and the special law treats the same subject in particular.

o Exceptions: 1) Where the legislature clearly intended the later

general enactment to cover the whole subject and to repeal all prior laws inconsistent therewith, the general law prevails over a special law on the subject. Special law repealed.

2) Where the special law merely establishes a general rule while the general law creates a specific and special rule, general law prevails.

Reference statutes


o A statute which refers to other statutes and makes them applicable to the subject of legislation

o Incorporation in a statute of another statute by reference

o Frequently used to avoid encumbering the statute books of unnecessary repetition

o Adoption by reference of a statute that was previously repealed revives the statute

o Adoption takes the adopted statute as it exists at the time of adoption and does not include subsequent changes or modification of the statute so taken, unless it does so expressly

o Construed as to harmonize with, and give effect to, the adopted statute

Supplemental statutes

o One intended to supply deficiencies in an existing statute and to add to, complete, or extend the statute without changing or modifying its original text

Reenacted statutes

o Statute which reenacts a previous statute or the provisions thereof; one in which the provisions of an earlier statute are reproduced in the same or substantially the same words

o Legislative expression of intention to adopt the construction as well as the language of the prior act

o When a statute or a provision thereof has been construed by the Supreme Court and the same is substantially reenacted, the legislature may be regarded as adopting such construction, and the construction becomes an integral part of the reenacted statute with the force and effect of a legislative command

o Where a statute provides that all laws not inconsistent with the provisions thereof are deemed incorporated and made integral parts thereof by reference, such previous laws on the same subject matter are deemed reenacted

Adopted statutes

o A statute patterned after, or copied from a statute of a foreign country

o Presumption: Legislature adopted such construction and practices with the adoption of the law but does not apply to construction given the statute subsequent to its adoption, although it has persuasive effect on the interpretation

AKBAYAN-YOUTH v. COMELEC

Facts: Petitioners, representing the youth sector, sought

COMELEC to conduct a special registration before the

May 14, 2001 General Elections. The special registration

would be for new voters ages 18-21, constituting four

million potential voters who failed to register on or before

the December 27, 2000 deadline provided by COMELEC

under RA. 8189.

with several COMELEC arms,

COMELEC disapproved the request on the ground that:

1) Section 8 of RA 8189 explicitly provides that no

registration shall be conducted during the period starting

one hundred twenty (120) days before the regular

elections.

Issue: W/N Section 28 of RA 8436 (invoked by petitioner)

and RA 8189 (invoked by COMELEC) are contradictory and

conflicting.

Held: No, they do not contradict. Through close reading it

can be harmonized and reconciled.

Every new statute should be construed in connection with

those already existing in relation to the same subject

matter and all should be made to harmonize and stand

together if they can be done by and fair and reasonable

interpretation

SESSION 13

STRICT AND LIBERAL CONSTRUCTION

Kind of construction depends upon the nature of the

statute, the purpose to be subserved and the mischief to

be remedied; that which will best accomplish the end

desired and effectuate legislative intent

Strict construction

o Construction according to the letter of a statute, which recognizes nothing that is not expressed, takes the language used in its exact meaning, and admits no equitable consideration

o Scope shall not be extended or enlarged by implication, intendment, or equitable consideration beyond the literal meaning of its terms

o Close and conservative adherence to the literal or textual interpretation

Liberal construction

o Such equitable construction as will enlarge the letter of a statute to accomplish its intended purpose, carry out its intent, or promote justice

o Does not mean enlargement of a provision which is clear, unambiguous and free from doubt for a statute which is plain and clear is not subject to construction

o Statute will be given a liberal interpretation so as to save the statute from obliteration

Liberal construction vs. Judicial legislation


o Construction: court from the language used, the subject matter, and the purpose of the legislature will be able to find out the true meaning of the statute; legitimate exercise of judicial power

o Legislation: act of the court in engrafting upon a law something which it believes ought to have been embraced therein; forbidden by the tripartite division of powers

Construction should promote social justice – constitutional mandate

Construction should promote general welfare or growth

of civilization

o Reason of the law is the life of the law o Salus populi suprema lex = voice of the people is the

supreme law o Statuta pro publico commodo late interpretantur =

statutes enacted for the public good are to be construed liberally

Strict Construction

Remember that rules of interpretation are rules of construction, not destruction

Penal statutes against the state o Test is whether a penalty is imposed for the

punishment of a wrong to the public or for the redress of an injury to an individual

o Strictly construed against the state and liberally in favor of the accused

o Where a statute penalizes the omission of an act on certain specific occasions, it cannot be construed to penalize it on all occasions

o No person should be brought within the terms of a statute who is not clearly within them, nor should any act be pronounced criminal which is not clearly made so by the statute

o Reason: safeguard the rights of the accused and at the same time preserve the obvious intention of the legislature; purpose is to provide a precise definition of forbidden acts

o Acts in and of themselves innocent and lawful cannot be held to be criminal unless there is a clear and unequivocal expression of the legislative intent to make them such

o Actus non facit reum nisi mens sit rea = the act itself does not make a man guilty unless his intention were so

o Actus me invito factus non est meus actus = an for the support of the governmentact done by me against my will is not my act

o Construction depends upon the intent of the legislature, taking into consideration the nature of the offense, the purpose to be accomplished and

such other factors as will throw light upon the meaning of the language

o Limitations: 1) Where the language is plain and positive, willful

intent and purpose, nothing is left to interpretation

2) Where a literal meaning would lead to absurdity, contradiction, injustice, or would defeat the clear purpose of the law, the court should consider the spirit and reason of a statute. Strict construction of a criminal statute does not mean such construction as to deprive it of the meaning intended.

Statutes in derogation of rights against the state

o State may enact legislations curtailing or restricting enjoyment of certain rights (inherent, guaranteed by Constitution or protected by law) in the exercise of its police power

o Where there are two reasonably possible constructions, one which would diminish or restrict a fundamental right of the people and the other which would not do so, the latter construction must be adopted so as to allow full enjoyment of such fundamental right

Statutes granting privileges to certain entities against

the grantee

o Those who invoke a special privilege granted by a statute must comply strictly with its provisions or lose them

o Privilegia recipiunt largam interpretationem voluntati consonam concedentis = privileges are to be interpreted in accordance with the will of him who grants them

o Dura lex sed lex = the law may be harsh, but that is the law; applied in the matter of rights and privileges granted subject to conditions

Legislative grants to local government units against the

grantee

o Grants of a public nature (usually a gratuitous donation of public money or property) which result in an unfair advantage to the grantee

o Narrowly restricted in favor of the public

Statutory grounds for suspension or removal of public

officials

o Remedy of removal is a drastic one and penal in nature

o Strictly construed to prevent injustice and harm to the public interest

o Distinguishes between the character of the man and the character of the officer, and limits the grounds for removal to only those as enumerated


Naturalization laws against the applicant

o Right to become a citizen by naturalization is statutory, not natural

Statutes imposing taxes and customs duties most

strongly against the state

o Burdens are not to be imposed nor presumed to be imposed beyond what statutes expressly and clearly import

o Reason: burdens personal and property rights of the people; taxation a destructive power

Statutes granting tax exemptions against the taxpayer

o Taxation lifeblood of nation and as such, is the rule and exemption the exception

o Basis: to minimize the different treatment and foster impartiality, fairness, and equality of treatment among taxpayers

o Limitations: 1) Where the law provides no qualification for the

granting of tax exemption, the court is not at liberty to supply one

2) Does not apply in tax exemptions in favor of the government itself or its agencies (exemption is the rule, taxation the exemption)

Statutes concerning the sovereign

o Restrictive statutes imposing burdens on the public treasury strictly construed

o Do not embrace the sovereign unless the sovereign is specifically mentioned

Statutes authorizing suits against the government

o Basis: There can be no legal right as against the authority that makes the law on which the right depends (Nullum tempus occurrit regi)

o Subjects the state to inconvenience and loss of governmental efficiency

o May not be circumvented by directing the action against the officers of the state instead of against the state itself

o Consent to be sued should not be interpreted to authorize garnishment of public funds to satisfy a judgment against the State or the issuance of a writ of execution against government property

Statutes prescribing formalities of will against testator

o Will must be executed in accordance with statutory requirements or else entirely void

o Court is seeking to ascertain and apply legislators’ intent, not testator’s

Exceptions and Provisos against exceptions and in favor

of general provisions

o Preference is an exception to the general rule

Liberal Construction

General welfare legislation in favor of those whom the

law intended to benefit

o Statutes enacted to implement the social justice and protection-to-labor provisions of the Constitution

o Labor laws, tenancy laws, land reform laws, social security laws

General welfare clause on the power of local

governments in favor of LGUs

o 2 branches: 1) Main trunk of municipal authority

Ordinances and regulations necessary to carry into effect and discharge the powers and duties conferred upon local legislative bodies by law

2) Independent of the specific functions enumerated by law

Ordinances necessary and proper to provide for the health and safety, promote the prosperity, improve the morals, peace, good order, comfort, and convenience of the LGU and the inhabitants thereof, and for the protection of property therein

o More powers to LGUs in promoting economic condition, social welfare and material progress of the people in the community

o Elastic and must be responsive to various social conditions

Statutes prescribing limitations on taxing powers in

favor of LGUs

o 1973 Constitution gives LGUs power to create its own sources of revenue and to levy taxes, etc.

Statutes prescribing prescriptive period to collect taxes

in favor of taxpayers

o Beneficial to both government (tax officers obliged to act promptly) and citizens (security against unscrupulous tax agents)

o Remedial measure to bring about beneficial purpose of affording protection to taxpayers

Statutes imposing penalties for nonpayment of tax in

favor of government

o Supported by strong reasons of public policy and imperatives of public welfare

o Intended to hasten tax payments or to punish evasions or neglect of duty in respect thereto

o Should be construed to avoid the possibilities of tax evasions

Election laws to give effect to the express will of the

electorate


o Intended to safeguard the will of the people in their choice of their representatives; involves public interest

o Technicalities should not be sanctioned when it will be an obstacle in the determination of the true will of the electorate

Amnesty proclamations in favor of amnesty

o Purpose: encourage the return to the fold of the law of those who have veered from it

o Amnesty and pardon synonymous thus, grant of pardon should likewise be construed liberally in favor of those pardoned

Statutes prescribing prescriptions of crimes in favor of

the accused

Statute of limitation or prescription of offense in the

nature of an amnesty granted by the state after a certain

time has passed

o Liberality of construction belongs to all acts of amnesty and grace

Adoption statutes in favor of the adopted

o Liberal concept that the statutes hold the interest and welfare of the child to be of paramount consideration

o Liberally construed to promote the noble and compassionate objectives of the law

Veteran and retirement pension laws in favor of

pensioners

o Remedial in character o Expression of gratitude to and recognition of those

who rendered service to the country by extending to them regular monetary benefit

o Liberally construed to the end that their noble purpose is best accomplished but should prevent a person from receiving double pension or compensation unless the law provides otherwise

o (case law) Administrative regulations adopted under legislative authority by a particular department must be in harmony with the provisions of the law, and should be for the sole purpose of carrying into effect its general provisions

Rules of Court in favor of litigants

o Procedural in character o Purpose: the proper, just, speedy and inexpensive

determination of a litigation o Should not be interpreted to sacrifice substantial

rights of a litigant at the altar of technicalities to the consequent impairment of the principles of justice

o Litigants should be given ample opportunity to prove their respective claims and a possible denial of

substantial justice due to legal technicalities should be avoided

Other statutes

o Remedial in nature o Redemption laws purpose: to enable the debtor to

have his property applied to pay as many of his liabilities as possible

o Construction in favor of exemption from execution (beneficent and humane purpose)

o Laws on attachment to promote their objects and assist the parties in obtaining speedy justice

o Warehouse receipt laws in favor of bona fide holders of such receipts

o Probation law by extending the benefits thereof to anyone not specifically disqualified (purpose is to give offenders a second chance to maintain his place in society through the process of reformation)

o Statute granting powers to a Constitutional agency for the advancement of the purposes and objectives for which it was created

PENA v. HRET

Facts: Alleged here is a protest regarding fraud during an

election in the 2nd district of Palawan, which resulted to

the win of Abueg. Pena claims he is the real winner of

election if not for the massive fraud and widespread vote-

buying.

Held: Pena failed to specify the precints where the fraud

occurred. SC agreed with respondents, conceding that

statutes providing for election contests are to be liberally

construed to the end that the will of the people in the

choice of public officers may not be defeated by mere

technical questions. However, the SC further stated that a

protest must stand or fail based upon the issues raised in

the original or amended pleading filed prior to the lapse

of the statutory period for filing of the protest. The Court

found that the omission by the petitioner was fatal to his

complaint because it goes to the very substance of the

complaint. And since the complaint itself lacked in form

and substance, the HRET had no other recourse but to

dismiss the petition.

-established that the power

to annul an election should be exercised with the greatest

care as it involves the free and fair expression of the

popular will. It is only in extreme cases of fraud and under

circumstances w/c demonstrate the to the fullest degree

a fundamental and wanton disregard of the law that the

elections are annulled, and then only when it becomes

impossible to take any other step.


averments to prosper, otherwise, the whole election

process will deteriorate into an endless stream of crabs

pulling at each other, racing to disembank from the

water.

CIR v. B.F. Goodrich Philippines Inc.

Facts: Assailed here are various letter of assessments

regarding tax liabilities of Goodrich for his plantation.

Upon appeal to CA, the CTA decision was

reversed on the ground that the 5-year period for

assessment has prescribed. “Falsity” of the filed income

tax return which was used by CTA in circumventing the

prescription is not among the grounds for exception in the

5-year rule as stated in Section 337 of the Tax Code. The

exceptions provided by the law include “fraud, irregularity

and mistake” on the part of the taxpayer.

Held: CIR’s right to assess the deficiency donor’s tax has

prescribed. Laws on prescription as a remedial measures

should be construed liberally; it’s exceptions should be

interpreted strictly

PHILEX MINING CORPORATION v. CIR

Facts: Various tax refunds were assailed by the petitioner.

CTA based the refund on Sections 1 and 2 of RA 1435,

instead of petitioner’s claim that it be based on the

increase rates imposed by Sections 142 and 145 (which

became 153 and 156) of the National Internal Revenue

Code (NIRC) as amended.

Held: Since the partial refund is in the nature of a tax

exemption, it must be construed strictly against the

grantee. No expression of a legislative will authorizing a

refund based on the higher rates claimed by petitioner.

Law did not specifically provide for a refund based on the

increased rates.

MANDATORY AND DIRECTORY STATUTES

Classification is important in resolving the question of what effect should be given to the mandate of a statute

No absolute test for determining classification but primary object is to ascertain legislative intent which must be obtained from all the surrounding circumstances (entire statute, nature, object, purpose, legislative history, in connection with other related statutes, consequences in construing it one way or the other)

Does not depend on form of statute but on its effect

Depends on whether the thing directed to be done is of the essence of the thing required or is a mere matter of form

Determined primarily from the language of the statute; “shall” and “may” rule is not absolute

A negative statute is mandatory o One expressed in negative words or in the form of an

affirmative proposition qualified by the word “only,” said word having the force of an exclusionary negation

o Cannot be directory since only one way to obey Distinction applicable to both fundamental and

statutory laws

Mandatory Statutes

Matter of substance Legislative intent that compliance essential to the

validity of an act Statute which contains words of command or of

prohibition (shall, must, ought, should, cannot, shall not, ought not)

Where a statute provides for the doing of some act which is required by justice or public duty, or where it vests a public body or officer with power and authority to take such action which concerns the public interest or rights of individuals

What law decrees must be obeyed against pain of sanction or declaration of nullity of what is done in disregard thereof

Statutes conferring power

o Construed as imposing rather than conferring privileges since for benefit of third persons, not of public officers

Statutes granting benefits

o When certain conditions are required before benefits can be availed of, conditions mandatory

Statutes prescribing jurisdictional requirements

o Statutory requirements by which courts or tribunals acquire jurisdiction to hear and decide particular actions must be strictly complied with before the courts or tribunals can have authority to proceed

Statutes prescribing time to take action or to appeal

o Indispensable to the prevention of needless delays and to the orderly and speedy discharge of business

o Necessary incident to the proper, efficient, and orderly discharge of judicial functions

o Require strict, not substantial, compliance and are not waivable nor can they be subject to agreements or stipulations


o Jurisdictional (procedural) in nature o Reason: sound public policy demands that judgments

should become final at some definite date fixed by law (Interest reipublicae ut sit finis litium = public interest requires that by the very nature of things there must be an end to a legal controversy)

Statutes prescribing procedural requirements

o Every act which is jurisdictional, or of the essence of the proceedings, or is prescribed for the protection or benefit of the party affected

Election laws on conduct of election

o Affects the conduct of the elections and those which direct or require election officials to do or perform certain acts; procedural in nature

o Purpose: to preserve the sanctity of the ballot and carry out the will of the electorate

o Mandatory before the elections; directory after especially if voters will be deprived of their votes without any fault on their part if mandatory

Election laws on qualification and disqualification

o Mandatory whether before or after elections

Statutes prescribing qualifications for office

o Eligibility to a public office is of a continuing nature and must exist at the commencement of the term and during the occupancy of the office

o If a person is not qualified at the time he assumed office, or he loses such eligibility or qualifications during the continuance of his incumbency, he may be ousted from office

Statutes relating to assessment of taxes

o Mandatory when intended for the security of the citizens, to insure the equality of taxation, for certainty as to the nature and amount of each other’s tax

o Directory when merely for information or direction of officers or to secure methodical and systematic modes of proceedings

Statutes concerning public auction sale

o In derogation of property rights and due process o Mandatory with respect to the prescribed procedure

Directory Statutes

Matter of convenience No substantial rights depend on it, no injury can result

from ignoring it, and the legislative intent can be accomplished in a manner other than that prescribed with substantially the same result

Statute which is permissive or discretionary in nature (may)

Noncompliance not necessary to validity of the act Constitutional provisions are directory where they

refer to matters merely procedural

Statutes prescribing guidance for officers

o Do not limit their power or render its exercise in disregard of the requisitions ineffectual

o Regulations designed to secure order, system and dispatch in proceedings

Statutes prescribing manner of judicial action

o Requirements that judges should follow in the discharge of their functions

o Purpose: to provide an orderly procedure for the conduct of public business

o Procedure merely secondary to substantive right

Statutes requiring rendition of decision within

prescribed period (Constitutional time provisions)

o Directory unless language of the statute contains negative words or shows that the designation of the time was intended as a limitation of power, authority or right

o Ground of expediency: less injury results to the general public by disregarding than enforcing the letter of the law

o Failure to comply within prescribed period does not deprive judges of jurisdiction but they will face administrative sanctions

PROSPECTIVE AND RETROACTIVE STATUTES

Presumption: All laws operate prospectively, unless intended otherwise by express declaration or necessary implication, whether the statute is in the form of an original enactment, an amendment or a repeal o Lex prospicit, non respicit = law looks forward, not

backward o Lex de futuro, judex de praeterito = law provides for

the future, the judge for the past o Nova constitutio futuris formam imponere debet non

praeteritis = a new statute should affect the future, not the past

Reason: a law is a rule established to guide actions with no binding effect until it is enacted; has no application to past but only to future times

Presumption stronger with reference to substantive laws affecting pending actions or proceedings

Law may be made operative partly on facts that occurred prior to the effectivity of such law without being retroactive


Prospectivity applies to statutes, administrative rulings and circulars and judicial decisions (evidence of what the laws mean)

General rule does not apply to statutes relating to remedies or modes of procedure which neither create new nor take away vested rights but only operate in furtherance of the remedy or confirmation of rights already existing and is presumptively applicable to all actions

Word “shall” implies that the lawmakers intend the enactment to be effective only in the future

When law expressly provides that it shall be retroactive but it violates any of the constitutional restrictions, it shall be applied prospectively to save it from being declared unconstitutional

Prospective Statutes

One which operates upon facts or transactions that occur after the statute takes effect, one that looks and applies to the future

Penal statutes

o Nullum crimen sine poena, nulla poena sine legis = there is no crime without a penalty, and there is no penalty without a law

o Art. 21 RPC

Ex post facto law

o Retroactive application prohibited by Constitution but limited in scope and applies only to penal matters, not to laws which concern civil proceedings generally or which affect or regulate civil or private rights or political privilege

o Test: Does the law sought to be applied retroactively take from an accused any right that was regarded at the time as vital for the protection of life and liberty? Yes = EPF law

1) Law which makes criminal an act done before the passage of the law and which was innocent when done, and punishes such act

2) Law which aggravates a crime, or makes it greater than it was, when committed

3) Law which changes the punishment and inflicts a greater punishment than that annexed to the crime when committed

4) Law which alters the legal rules of evidence, and authorizes conviction upon less or different testimony than the law required at the time of the commission of the offense

5) Law which assumes to regulate civil rights and remedies only, but in effect imposes penalty or

deprivation of a right for something which when done was lawful

6) Law which deprives a person accused of a crime of some lawful protection to which he has become entitled, such as protection of a former conviction or acquittal, or a proclamation of amnesty

Bill of attainder prohibited by Constitution

o Legislative act which inflicts punishment without judicial trial; has EPF features

o Characteristics: singling out of a definite minority; imposition of a burden on it; legislative intent; retroactive application to past conduct

o Essence: substitution of a legislative for a judicial determination of guilt

o Purpose of constitutional bar: implement the principle of separation of powers by confining the legislature to rule-making and thereby forestalling legislative usurpation of judicial functions

o History: BoA employed to suppress unpopular causes and political minorities

Statutes substantive in nature

o Law which creates, defines or regulates rights concerning life, liberty or property and duties which give rise to a cause of action, or the powers of agencies or instrumentalities for the administration of public affairs; that which declares what acts are crimes and prescribes the punishment for committing them (as applied to criminal law)

o Substantive right = one which includes those rights which one enjoys under the legal system prior to the disturbance of normal relations

o May not be construed retroactively without somehow affecting previous or past rights or obligations

o May not retroact to govern pending proceedings in the absence of clear contrary legislative intent and no vested rights are impaired

o Rule: case must be decided in the light of the law as it exists at the time of the decision by the appellate court, where the statute changing the law is intended to be retroactive and to apply to pending litigations; true though it may result in the reversal of a judgment which was correct at the time it was rendered by trial court but subject to limitation concerning constitutional restrictions against impairment of vested rights

Statutes affecting vested rights

o Vested right or interest = some right or interest in property that has become fixed or established and is no longer open to doubt or controversy; absolute, complete, and unconditional, independent of a contingency

o Inchoate rights which have not been acted on are not vested


o Prospective operation to sustain its constitutionality where a retroactive application will produce invalidity by impairing or interfering with vested or existing substantive rights

Statutes affecting obligations of contract

o Contract must be in accordance with the applicable law at the time of execution

o Constitution prohibits enactment of a law impairing the obligation of contracts

o If a contract is legal at its inception, it cannot be rendered illegal by a subsequent legislation

o For a right to accrue is one thing; enforcement thereof by actual payment is another

Repealing and amendatory acts

o General rule on prospective operation of statutes also applies to amendatory acts even if they are generally construed as becoming a part of the original act as if it had always been contained therein

o After an act is amended, the original act continues to be in force with regard to all rights that had accrued prior to such amendment

Statutes relating to prescription

o Procedural in nature o General rule: applies to all actions filed after its

effectivity o Prospective in the sense that it applies to causes that

accrued and will accrue after it took effect and retroactive in the sense that it applies to causes that accrued before its passage

o Legislature usually manifests its intent to apply a statute of limitation retroactively

Statutes relating to appeals

o Right to appeal from adverse judgment statutory and may be restricted or taken away

o Remedial or procedural in nature and applies to pending actions at time of enactment

o Statute shortening the period for taking appeals prospective in the absence of clear legislative intent to the contrary and may not be applied to pending proceedings in which judgment has already been rendered at the time of enactment

Retroactive Statutes

Law which creates a new obligation, imposes a new duty or attaches a new disability in respect to a transaction already past

Remedial or curative statutes as well as statutes which create new rights are intended to be retroactive by their nature and do not impair contractual or vested rights

Penal laws when favorable to the accused

o Basis: founded on the very principles on which the right of the state to punish and impose penalty is based; exception founded on principles of justice, not on political considerations

o Exception justified by conscience and good law o Assumption: two laws affecting the liability of the

accused – one in force at the time of the commission of the crime and the other enacted during or after the trial of the criminal action

o Limitations: 1) Accused a habitual delinquent 2) Later statute expressly provides that it shall not

apply to existing actions or pending cases 3) Accused disregards the later law and invokes the

prior statute under which he was prosecuted

Procedural laws

o Adjective law = prescribes rules and forms of procedure of enforcing rights or obtaining redress for their invasion; rules of procedure by which courts can properly administer justice

o Statutes regulating the procedure of the courts applicable to actions pending and undetermined at the time of their passage – retroactive in that sense and to that extent

o As a general rule, no vested right may attach to, nor arise from, procedural laws

o An administrative rule which is interpretative of a pre-existing statute and not declarative of certain rights with obligations thereunder is retroactive as of the date of the effectivity of the statute

o (case law) Litigants cannot be permitted to choose a forum of convenience. Jurisdiction is imposed by law and not by any of the parties to such proceedings.

o May not be applied retroactively to pending actions if expressly declared or by necessary implication, impairs vested rights, not feasible or would work injustice, involves intricate problems of due process or impairs the independence of the courts

Curative statutes

o One which cures defects and adds to the means of enforcing existing obligations

o Intended to supply defects, abridge superfluities in existing laws, and curb certain evils

o Purpose: to give validity to acts done that would have been invalid under existing laws, as if existing laws have been complied with

o Can cure pending actions but not that which has attained finality

o “will result in neither impairment of any contractual obligation, disturbance of any vested right nor breach of some constitutional guaranty” (Frivaldo vs. COMELEC)

Police power legislations


o Statutes which are enacted in the exercise of police power to regulate certain activities

o Reason: non-impairment of contractual obligations or vested rights must yield to the legitimate exercise of the power by the legislature to prescribe regulations to promote the health, morals, peace, education, good order, safety and general welfare of the people

o Reservation of the essential attributes of sovereign power deemed read into every statute or contract as a postulate of the legal order

Prescription in criminal and civil cases

o Civil: statute enacted by legislature as impartial arbiter between two contending parties; no intendment to be made in favor of either party; no rights granted and thus, construction presumption against no grantor

o Criminal: state is grantor, surrendering by act of grace its right to prosecute; liberally construed and is also retroactive if favorable to accused

Amendment, Revision, Codification and Repeal

Amendment

Change or modification, by addition, deletion, or alteration, of a statute which survives in its amended form

May be express or implied amendment done through enactment of amendatory act

Power to amend any existing law inherent in the

legislature

o Authority part of legislative power to enact, alter and repeal laws

o SC no authority – legislative exclusive prerogative

Amendment by implication

o Neither presumed nor favored o Usually shown by a statement in the later act that

any provision of law inconsistent therewith is modified accordingly

o Operates as long as there is an irreconcilable repugnancy between the earlier and later law

o Where a part of a prior statute embracing the same subject as the later act may not be enforced without nullifying the pertinent provision of the latter – prior act deemed amended to the extent of the repugnancy

Takes effect 15 days after publication in OG or newspaper of general circulation unless different date is specified therein

Construction of amendment

o As if the original statute has been repealed and a new and independent act in the amended form had been adopted

o As if the statute has been originally enacted in its amended form

o As a continuation of the existing law and not as a new enactment

o Should be different from that of original statute since presumed that legislature would not have amended if did not want to change its meaning

o Suppression of excepting clause amounts to withdrawal of the exemption allowed under the original act

General rule: prospective unless contrary provided or

procedural law (relating to procedure in courts), at which

case applicable to pending and undetermined actions at

time of amendment

Rights which have become vested under a statute before its amendment may not be affected by such

Effect of amendment on jurisdiction

o Jurisdiction of a court to try cases determined by the law in force at the time the action is instituted and remains with the court until the case is finally decided therein

o Subsequent statute amending a prior act with the effect of divesting the court of jurisdiction may not be construed to operate to oust jurisdiction that has already attached under the prior law else it will be a subversion of the judicial process

o Also applies to quasi-judicial bodies Amendatory act, if complete by itself, will be

considered as an original or independent act Where amendatory act is declared unconstitutional,

it is as if the amendment did not exist, and the original statute before the attempted amendment remains unaffected and in force

Revision and Codification

Purpose: to restate the existing laws into one statute, simplify complicated provisions, and make the laws on the subject easily found

Problem: what meaning or significance may be attached to any of the modifications or changes (insertion or omission of provisions, change in phraseology, rearranging of sections)

Construction to harmonize different provisions


o Presumption: author has maintained a consistent philosophy or position

o Code is enacted as a single, comprehensive statute and is to be considered as such, not as a series of disconnected articles or provisions

o Irreconcilable conflict? That which is best in accord with the general plan. No way to determine? That which is later in physical position, being the latest expression of legislative will

What is omitted is deemed repealed unless provided

otherwise

o Reason: revision or codification, by its very nature and purpose, intended to be a complete enactment on the subject and an expression of the whole law thereon

o Intent on part of legislature to abrogate those provisions of the old laws that are not reproduced in the revised statute or code

o Possible only if the revised statute or code was intended to cover the whole subject to be a complete and perfect system in itself

o New repeals old if it revises the whole subject matter of the old, both intent and scope evince the idea of a repeal, clear intention that new is substitute of old

Condensation a necessity in revision / codification

o Neither an alteration in phraseology nor the omission or addition of words in the later statute shall be held necessarily to alter the construction of the former acts

Construed as a continuation of existing laws

o Presumption: codifiers did not intend to change the law as it formerly existed

o Rearrangement of sections or parts of statute, breaking up of a single section into separate sections does not necessarily change the operation, effect or meaning of the statute unless legislative intent is clear and unmistakable

Repeal

Legislature has plenary power to repeal, abrogate or

revoke existing laws

o Power to repeal as complete as power to enact o Cannot enact irrepealable laws or limit future

legislative acts o SC no power to repeal – can only promulgate rules of

procedure

Kinds of repeal:

1) Total vs. Partial

T: statute rendered revoked completely

P: leaves the unaffected portions of the statute in force

2) Express vs. Implied

E: declaration in a statute that a particular and specific law, identified by its number or title, is repealed; identifies or designates the act or acts that are intended to be repealed

I: all other repeals not express Failure to add specific repealing clause indicates that

intent was not to repeal any existing law unless an irreconcilable inconsistency and repugnancy exist – falls under implied repeal

Presumption: legislature knows existing laws so that if a repeal is intended, proper step is to express it

Laws are repealed only by the enactment of subsequent

laws

o Not repealed by disuse or customs and practice to the contrary

o Violation or nonobservance not excused o Change in condition and circumstances after passage

of law which brought about the statute does not operate to repeal prior law

Repeal by implication

o Premise: Where a statute of later date clearly reveals an intention on the part of the legislature to abrogate a prior act on the subject, that intention must be given effect. Intent must be clear and manifest.

o General rule: Later act is to be construed as a continuation of, and not a substitute for, the first act and will continue so far as the two acts are the same from the time of the first enactment

o Not favored. Presumption against inconsistency and repugnancy and accordingly, against implied repeal. Every effort must be used to make all acts stand. If, by any reasonable construction, they can be reconciled, the later act will not operate as a repeal of the earlier.

Two categories of repeal by implication:

1) “By irreconcilable inconsistency” Where provisions in the two acts on the same

subject matter are in an irreconcilable conflict, the later act to the extent of the conflict constitutes an implied repeal of the earlier one.

When two statutes cover the same subject matter; clearly inconsistent and incompatible with each other that they cannot be reconciled or harmonized; both cannot be given effect, one law cannot be enforced without nullifying the other

Should embrace same subject and have same object

Fact that a later enactment may relate to the same subject matter is not of itself sufficient to


cause an implied repeal. The new statute may merely be cumulative or a continuation of the old one. What is necessary is a manifest indication of legislative purpose to repeal.

Inconsistency never presumed When the later law nullifies the reason or

purpose of the earlier act, so that the earlier act loses all meaning and function

Cardinal rule: Two inconsistent laws on the same subject cannot co-exist in one jurisdiction. Either they are reconciled or the later law repeals the prior law.

Leges posteriors priores contrarias abrogant = a later law repeals a prior law on the same subject which is repugnant thereto

2) “By revision or codification of the former laws” If the later act covers the whole subject of the

earlier one and is clearly intended as a substitute, it will operate to repeal the earlier law.

Only possible if the revised statute or code was intended to cover the whole subject to be a complete and perfect system in itself

A subsequent statute is deemed to repeal a prior law if the former revises the whole subject matter of the former statute. When both intent and scope clearly evince the idea of a repeal, all parts omitted from the revised act are deemed repealed.

Where a new statute is intended to furnish the exclusive rule on a certain subject

Other forms of implied repeal

o Most powerful implication of repeal is that which arises when the later of two laws is expressed in the form of a universal negative

o Repealing effects of affirmative/negative statutes 1) A: does not impliedly repeal prior law unless

intention to effect repeal is manifest 2) N: repeals all conflicting provisions unless

contrary intention disclosed o Where something is enacted in general terms and

afterwards another is passed on the same subject introducing special conditions or restrictions, former statute regarding the matter covered by the subsequent act considered repealed by implication

o Enactment of a statute on a subject whose purpose or object is diametrically opposed to that of an earlier law on the same subject, thereby depriving it of its reason for being, prior law repealed by implication

General repealing provision = clause which predicates the

intended repeal under the condition that a substantial

conflict must be found on existing and prior acts of the

same subject matter; intent not to repeal any existing law

unless an irreconcilable inconsistency and repugnancy

exists

o Significance: presence indicates legislative intent to repeal all prior inconsistent laws on the subject matter, even if prior law is a special law unless the general law contains a saving clause

o Later general law will ordinarily not repeal a prior special law on the same subject as special law is generally regarded as an exception

Repeals of statutes by implication are not favored. Presumption against inconsistency and repugnancy. Repeals by implication will not be decreed unless it is manifest that the legislature so intended. Every effort must be used to make all acts stand. If, by any reasonable construction, they can be reconciled, the later act will not operate as a repeal of the earlier.

As between two laws on same subject matter, that which is passed later prevails since it is the latest expression of legislative will o Applies even if the later act is made to take effect

ahead of the earlier law o Point of contention is passage, not effectivity o Presumption: legislature knew older law and

intended to change it

General law usually does not repeal prior special law

unless legislature intended to do so

o Presumption against implied repeal even though the terms of the general act are broad enough to include the matter covered by the special statute

o Generalia specialibus non derogant = general law does not nullify a specific or special law

o General law yields to the special law in the specific and particular subject embraced in the latter, irrespective of the date of passage

o Reason: special law evinces the legislative intent more clearly than the general statute

o Special later? Qualification of the general one. General later? Special law exception to its terms.

Special or general law repeals the other

o Where the later act is a special law, there is always a partial repeal of the general law to the extent of the repugnancy or exception

o General law when legislative intent is clear (general repealing clause; language would be useless if special law not repealed nor modified; so broad in its terms and so clear and explicit in its words as to show that it intended to cover the whole subject and displace the prior statute, etc.)

o No prohibition against the repeal even by implication of a special or specific act by a general or broad law, just not favored kasi saying naman ang oras ng legislature sa paggawa ng special law tapos i-re-


repeal mo lang kahit di naman ginusto ng legislature i-repeal yung special law sa paggawa nila ng general law

o Example: A charter must yield to the constitution and general laws of the state. When a charter is enacted, it is deemed to incorporate therein the general laws affecting local governments. A chartered city is not an independent sovereignty although its charter remains supreme in all matters not purely local.

Effects of repeal

o Renders statute inoperative as of the date the repealing act takes effect

o What a repeal does NOT do: 1) Statute was invalid from date of its enactment 2) Undo the consequences of the operation of the

statute while in force 3) Renders illegal what under the repealed act is legal or

vice versa Effect on jurisdiction o Repeal or expiration of statute granting jurisdiction

does not make decision subsequently rendered in actions pending adjudication null and void for want of authority unless otherwise provided

o Criminal cases: Jurisdiction previously acquired cannot be ousted unless the contrary is provided, express prohibitory words are used, or the criminal law violated is itself repealed

Effect on actions, pending or otherwise

o General rule: repeal of a statute defeats all actions and proceedings based on such statute, including those still pending

o Appellate court will dispose of a question according to the law prevailing at the time of disposition, not according to law prevailing at the time the appealed judgment was rendered

Effect on vested rights

o Repeal of statute does not destroy or impair rights that accrued or vested under old law then in force

o Constitution forbids state from impairing vested rights or obligations of contract by enacting or repealing statutes except in the legitimate exercise of police power

o Where a statute gives an appellant right to appeal from adverse decision, repeal of such statute after appeal has been perfected will not destroy his right to prosecute the appeal nor deprive the appellate court of the authority to decide the appealed case

Effect of repeal of tax laws

o Repeal does not preclude collection of taxes assessed under the old law before it was repealed, unless otherwise provided

o General rule: Repeal prospective

Effect of repeal and reenactment

o Reenactment neutralizes repeal and continues law in force without interruption

o Simultaneous repeal and reenactment of statute does not affect rights and liabilities accrued under original statute

o Criminal cases: when reenactment of repealed law not simultaneous (continuity broken), repeal deprives court of its jurisdiction over violations of the old law prior to its repeal

Effect of repeal of penal laws

o When repeal absolute such that crime no longer exists or where the repealing statute wholly fails to penalize the acts which constituted the offense in the repealed law, court loses jurisdiction over violations of repealed law

o Reason: repeal a legislative act of rendering legal what is previously decreed as illegal

o Exceptions: 1) Where the repealing act reenacts the statute and

penalizes the same act previously penalized under the repealed law

2) Where the repealing act contains a saving clause providing that pending actions shall not be affected

Repeal vs. Expiration of law : Effects

o Absolute Repeal: crime is obliterated, stigma of conviction for violation of penal law before its repeal erased

o Expiration of criminal statute by its own force: ano ka, sinuswerte? Ex-convict ka pa rin!

Effect of repeal of municipal charter

o General rule: Repeal of a charter destroys all offices under it and puts an end to the functions of the incumbents

Effect of repeal or nullity of repealing law

o When a law which expressly repeals a prior law is itself repealed, the law first repealed shall not thereby be revived, unless expressly so provided.

o Where a law which repeals a prior law by implication is repealed, the prior law is revived

o unless the language of the repealing statute provides otherwise.

o Where a repealing statute is declared unconstitutional, it will have no effect of repealing the former statute which will continue to remain in force.

Brought to you by Kristine Mae Manalo

A2015 Legal Method Finals Reviewer - Molo

Documents

Transcript of A2015 Legal Method Finals Reviewer - Molo