CHAPTER 4: CONSTRUCTION AND INTERPRETATION OF WORDS AND PHRASES

Legislative intent is ascertained from the language of the statute.

If the language is clear and unambiguous it must be applied literally.

Where the law does not distinguish, courts should not distinguish. General words and phrases
in a statute should ordinarily be accorded their natural and general significance.

When the law does not make any exception, courts may not except something unless
compelling reasons exist to justify.

General terms in a statute are to receive a general construction, unless restrained by the
context or by plain inferences from the scope and purpose of the act.

General terms or provision in a statute may be restrained and limited by specific terms or
provisions with which they are associated.

Special terms in a statute may sometimes be expanded to a general signification by the

consideration that the reason of the law is general.

General terms may be restricted by specific words, with the result that the general language will
be limited by specific language which indicates the statute’s object and purpose. The rule is
applicable only to cases wherein, except for one general term, all the items in an enumeration
belong to or fall under one specific class.

Ejusdem Generis
It is a general rule of statutory construction that where general words follow an enumeration of
persons or things, by words of a particular and specific meaning, such general words are not to
be construed in their widest extent, but are to be held as applying only to persons or things of
the same general kind or class as those specifically mentioned.

It is a tool of statutory construction resorted to when legislative intent is uncertain.

Express mention and Implied Exclusion

The EM of one person, thing, or consequence is tantamount to an express exclusion of all
others.

Anything that is not included in the enumeration is excluded therefrom and a meaning that does
not appear nor is intended or reflected in the very language of the statute cannot be placed
therein.

The logic is that the legislature would not have made specific enumeration in a statute if it had
the intention not to restrict its meaning and confine it terms to those expressly mentioned.
Associated words
They explain and limit each other

When a word used in a statute is ambiguous or vague, its meaning may be made clear and
specific by considering the company in which it is found and the meaning of the terms which are
associated with it.

Negative words are regarded as mandatory; affirmative are mere directory

“May” connotes a permissible thing; “Shall” is imperative; “Must” not always imperative and may
be consistent with an exercise of discretion.

“And” a conjunction that connects words or phreases expressing the idea that the latter is to be
added to or taken along with the first; “Or” is used to express as alternative or to give a choice of
one among two or more things. “Only” means exclusive.

Function of proviso
Proviso is a clause or part of a clause in the statute, the office of which is either except
something from the enacting clause, or to qualify or restrain its generality, or to exclude some
possible ground of misinterpretation of its extent.
“Provided” is the word used in introducing a proviso.

CHAPTER 4 PRESUMPTIONS IN AID OF CONSTRUCTION AND INTERPRETATION

In construing a doubtful or ambiguous statute, the courts will presume that it was the intention of
the legislature to enact a valid, sensible and just law, and one which should change the prior law
no further than may be necessary to effecuate the specific purpose of the act in question.

Presumptions cannot prevail against the clear and explicit terms of the law. If the language of
the law is clear, courts should not resort to presumptions.

Presumption against unconstitutionality

a. Laws are presumed constitutional, they shall not be declared invalid unless the conflict
with the constitution is clear beyond reasonable doubt.
b. Laws are presumed valid unless otherwise ruled by the court.
c. Burden of proof of invalidity rests on those who challenge it

Presumption against injustice

That in case of doubt in the interpretation or application of laws, it is presumed that the
lawmaking body intended right and justice to prevail.

A law should not be interpreted so as to cause an injustice.

Presumption against implied repeals

Repeals of laws by implication is not favored and that courts must generally assume their
congruent application. The two laws must be incompatible, and clear finding thereof must
surface, before the inference of implied repeal may be drawn.

All doubts must be resolved against implied repeal and all efforts should be exerted in order to
harmonize and give effect to all laws on the subject.

In absense of an express repeal, a subsequent law cannot be construed as repealing a prior law
unless an irreconsilable inconsistency and repugnancy exists in the terms of the new and old
laws.

Repeal by implication is not favored by law and is only resorted to in case of irreconcilable
inconsistency between the new and old law.

Presumption against ineffectiveness

It is presumed that the legislature intends to impart to its enactments such a meaning as will
render them operative and effective, and to prevent persons of defeating them.

In the interpretation of a statute, the Court should start with the assumption that the legislature
intended to enact an effective statute.

Presumption against absurdity

Statutes must receive a sensible construction such as will give effect to the legislative intention
so as to avoid an unjust and absurd conclusion. It is a presumption against the undesirable
consequences that were never intended by a legislative measure.

Presumption against violation of international law

This presumption is in conformity with the Declaration of Principles and State Policies in our
Constitution. It states that the Philippines as a democratic and republican state adopts the
generally accepted principles of international law as part of the law of the land and adheres to
the policy of peace, equality, justice, freedom, cooperation, and amity with all nations.

CHAPTER 6 INTRINSIC AIDS IN CONSTRUCTION AND INTERPRETATION

Intrinsic aids
are those aids within the statute. They are resorted to only if there is ambiguity in the statute. If
the language of the statute is clear and unequivocal there is no need to resort to intrinsic aids.

Title and substitle of the law can be used as an intrinsic aid in determining the legislative intent.

The intent of the law is culled from its preamble and from the sitation, circumstances and
conditions its sought to remedy, must be enforced. It is used as a guide in determining the intent
of the lawmaker.

CHAPTER 7 EXTRINSIC AIDS IN CONSTRUCTION AND INTERPRETATION

Extrinsic aids
Are existing aids from outside sources, meaning outside of the four corners of the statute. If
there is any doubt as to the meaning of the statute, the interpreter must first find that out within
the statute.

The interpreter must avail all the necessary intrinsic aids to determine the intention of the
legislature. If after availing all the intrinsic aids and still there remain some ambiguity in the
statute, then extrinsic aids may be consulted.

Extrinsic aids are resorted to after exhausting all the available intrinsic aids and still there
remain some ambuigity in the statute. They are:
1. History of the enactment of the statute
2. Opinions and rulings of officials of the government called upon to execute or implement
administrative laws
3. Contemporaneous construction by executive officers
4. Actual proceedings of the legislative body
5. Individual statements by members of congress
6. Author of the law
7. Explanatory note of the bill

Other sources can be:

1. Reports and Recommendations of legislative committees
2. Public policy
3. Judicial construction
4. Contruction by the bar

Where the statute is ambiguous, courts may examine both the printed pages of the publised Act
as well as those extrinsic matters that may aid in construing the meaning of the statute, such as
the history of its enactment, the reasons for the passage of the bill and purposes to be
accomplished by the measure.

Opinions and rulings of officials of government called upon to execute or implement

administrative laws command much respect and weight, unless completely erroneous.

Courts may avail themselves of the actual proceedings of the legislative body to assist in
determining the construction of a statute of doubtful meaning.

In case of doubt as to what a provision of a statute means, the meaning put to the provision
during the legislative deliberations may be adopted.

CHAPTER 8 STRICT AND LIBERAL CONSTRUCTION AND INTERPRETATION OF

STATUTES
PENAL LAWS
Penal laws are construed liberally in favor of the accused.
TAX LAWS
Taxes must not be imposed beyond what the law expressly and clearly declares as tax laws
must be construed strictly against the State and liberally in favor of the taxpayer.

In case of doubt, tax statutes are to be construed strictly against the government and liberally in
favor of the taxpayer, for taxes, being burdens, are not to be presumed beyond what the
applicable statute expressly and clearly declares.

As a rule, any claim for exemption from a tax statute is strictly construed against the taxpayer.
However, where the law is clear and unambiguous, the law must be taken as it is, devoid of
judicial addition or subtraction.

Tax exemption must be strictly construed against the taxpayer and liberally in favor of the state.

NATURALIZATION LAW
Naturalization laws should be rigidly enforced and stricly construed in favor of the government
and against the applicant.

INSURANCE LAW
Contracts of Insurance are to be construed liberally in favor of the insured and stricly against the
insurer.

LABOR AND SOCIAL LEGISLATIONS

The official agents charged by law to implement social justice guaranteed by the Constitution
should adopt a liberal attitude in favor of the employee in deciding claims for compensability.

Doubts in interpretation of Workmen’s Compensation and Labor Code should be resolved in

favor of the worker.

Social legislation is liberally construed.

The sympathy of the law on social security is towards its beneficiaries and the law by its own
terms, requires a construction of utmost liberality in their favor.

RETIREMENT LAWS
Well-settled is the rule that retirements laws are liberally interpreted in favor of the retiree
because the intention is to provide for the reitree’s sustenance and comfort, when he is no
longer capable of earning his livelihood.

ELECTION RULES
Laws governing election contests must be liberally construed to the end that the will of the
people in the choice of public officials may not be defeated by mere technical objections.
CHAPTER 9 PROSPECTIVE AND RETROSPECTIVE STATUTES
A statute which operates upon acts and transactions which have not occurred when the statute
takes effect, that is, which regulates the future, is a prospective statute. On the other hand, a
retrospective or retroactive law is one which takes away or impairs vested rights acquired under
existing laws, or creates new obligations and imposes new duties, or attaches new disabilities in
respect of transaction already past.

A canon of Statutory construction is that statutes operate prospectively only and never
retrospectively, unless the legislative intent to the contrary is made manifest either by the
express terms of the statute or by necessary implication. (CIVIL CODE: Laws shall have no
retroactive effect, unless the contrary is provided) Every case of doubt must be resolved against
retrospective effect.

Retroactive legislation is disfavored as a general rule because of its tendency to be unjust and
oppressive.

PENAL STATUTES
Penal statutes as a rule are applied prospectively. However, as an exception, it can be given
retroactive effect if it is favorable to the accused who is not a habitual criminal.

RA 8294 is not beneficial to the accused because it unduly aggravates the crime, such new law
will not be given retroactive application, lest it acquire the character of an ex post facto law.

PROCEDURAL LAWS
Well-settled is the rule that statutes regulating the procedure of the Court will be construed as
applicable to actions pending and undetermined at the time of their passage. Therefore,
procedural Laws are retrospective in that sense and to that extent. However, Rules of
Procedure should not be given retroactive effect if it would result in great injustice and impair
substantive right.

CURATIVE STATUTES
Curative statutes are those which undertake to cure errors and irregularities and administrative
proceedings, and which are designed to give effect to contracts and other transactions between
private parties which otherwise would fail of producing their intended consequences by reason
of some statutory disability or failure to comply with some technical requirement. Therefore, they
are retroactive in character but subject to the usual qualification against impairment of vested
rights.