Share 1589175960727 Notes Statutory Construction A Compendium

Notes
i
n
STATUTORYCONSTRUCTI
ON
(
ACompendi
um f
rom t
hebooksofRodr
iguez,
Mar
ti
nandAgpal
o,Pi
l
aresI
II
)
LASTREVI
SION:May1,
2020
CONCEPTSANDGENERALPRI
NCI
PLES
1.DEFI
NITI
ON:
STATUTORYCONSTRUCTI ON:I
tistheartorprocessofdi scover
ingand
expoundingthemeani ngandint
enti
onoft heauthorsofthel awwithrespectt
o
i
tsapplicat
ioninagivencase,wherethatint
enti
onisr endereddoubtfulamong
others,
byreasonoft hefactt
hatthegivencaseisnotexpl i
citl
yprovi
dedforin
thelaw.(Bl
ack,Int
erpret
ati
onofLaws, p.1)Cal
texv s.Palomar,18SCRA247)
Iti
sthear
tofseeki
ngt
heintenti
onoft
heaut
hor
soft
hel
awi
nenact
inga
st
atut
eandapplyi
ngtogiv
ensetoffacts.
Thear
torpr
ocessofascert
aini
ngt
hei
ntent
ionoft
hel
aw-
maki
ngbodyt
o
r
esol
veambigui
tyi
nthelaworit
spar t
.
Itisl
ikewi
sedefi
nedasthatbr
anchoft hel
awdeal
i
ngwi
tht
he
i
nter
pretati
onoflawsenact
edbyalegisl
atur
e.
Note: Thelegisl
atur
eispr esumedt oknowtherulesofconst
ruct
ionin
enacti
ngast at
ute.Thelegi
slatureenactsalawwit
ht heendinviewthati
twil
l,
in
caseofdoubt ,
beconstruedinaccor dancewit
hset
tledpri
ncipl
esand r ul
es
establ
ishedbylegalher
meneut ics.
Not
e:Onl
yst
atut
eswit
hambi
guousordoubt
fulmeani
ngmaybet
hesubj
ectof
st
atut
ory constr
ucti
on.
ELEMENTSOFTHEDEFI
NITI
ON:
GENUS:
Iti
sanar
t/actorpr
ocess
SPECI
E:STATUTORYCONSTRUCTI
ON
DEFERENTI
A:
Pur
pose: Toascer
tai
nthei
ntent
ionofCongr
ess(
aut
horoft
hel
aw)
.
“
Thecardinalr
ulei
nint
erpr
etat
ionofal
ll
awsi
stoascer
tai
n,andgi
ve
ef
fectt
o,thei
ntentofthel
aw”
“Thepur
poseofSt
attut
oryConstructi
onist
odeter
mi nelegi
slat
ivei
ntent
whent
hesamecannotbereadi
lyascer
tainedfr
om thepl
ainlanguageofthelaw.
”
ATTY.NESTORMONDOK 1
Pr
ofessor
,St
atut
oryConst
ruct
ion
COLLEGEOFLAW
UNIVERSI
TYOFTHECORDI LLERAS
“
PRINCIPLEOFEFFECTIVENESS–astat
utemustber
eadi
nsuchaway
ast
ogi
veeff
ecttothepur
poseproj
ect
edi
nthestat
ute”
.
WHEN:byreasonofambi
gui
tyi
nthel
anguageoft
hel
aw–t
hef
act
soft
hecase
i
snotexpl
i
citl
yprov
idedf
ori
nthel
aw.
*Acondi t
ionsinequanon, beforethecourtmayconstr
ueorinterpr
etastat
ute,i
s
thattherebedoubtorambi gui
tyinitslanguage.Element
aryi
st her
ulethatwhenthelaw
i
scl ear,
itisincumbentupont hejudget oapplythem r
egardl
essofpersonalbel
i
efor
predil
ections-whent helawinunambi guousandunequi v
ocal,
appli
cati
onnot
i
nterpretati
ont heref
oreisi
mper at
ive..
"
AMBI
GUI
TY
Ambi gui
tyi
sdoubtf
ulness,
doubl
enessofmeaning,i
ndist
inct
nessoruncert
aint
y
th
ofmeaningofanexpressi
onusedinawrit
teninst
rument.(
BlackLawDicti
onary
,4
Edi
ti
on,p.105)
Ambi guit
ymeansaconditi
onofadmi tti
ngtwoormoremeani ngs,ofbei
ng
understoodinmor ethanonewayorofr ef
erri
ngtoormor et
hingsatthesamet i
me-iti
s
susceptibl
et omorethanone interpr
etat
ion.Alawisdeemedambi guouswheniti
s
capableofbei ngunderst
oodbyreasonabl
ywel li
nfor
medpersonintwoormor esenses.
I
thasbeenhel dthatambi guitydoesnotonl yarisefrom themeani ngoft he
part
icul
arwordsbutal sofrom thegener al scopeandmeani ngoft hestat utewhenall
theprovi
sionsareexami ned.Thereisal soambi guitywhenal i
terali
nterpretati
on of
thewordswoul dleadtounr easonable,unjust,orabsur dconsequences, orwher ea
stat
uteisinconfli
ctwiththeconst i
tuti
on, orwher ethest at
utewoul ddef eatthepoli
cy
ofthelegi
slat
ion.(Tar
lacDev elopmentCor porat
ionv s.C.A.,L-
41012, Sept ember30,
1976)
Thejudi
ciar
yinter
pret
show l
egisl
ati
onshouldappl
yinapar
ti
cul
arcaseasno
l
egi
slat
ionunambiguousl
yandspeci
fi
call
yaddr
essesal
lmatter
s.
Ambi
gui
tymayar
isef
rom v
ari
ousr
easons.Someofwhi
char
ethef
oll
owi
ng:
Wor
dsarei
mperfectsy
mbol
stocommuni
cat
eint
ent
.Theyar
eambi
guousandchange
i
nmeani
ngovert
ime.
Not
ethatambi
gui
ti
esmayl
eadt
oinv
ali
dconcl
usi
ons.
Fal
laci
esofambi
gui
ty:
a)Equi
vocati
on-mostwor dshav emorethanonel i
ter
almeaning,andmost
ofthetimewehav enodi f
ficul
tykeepi
ngt hosemeaningsseparateby
noti
ngthecontextandusi ngourgoodsensewhenr eadi
ngandl i
steni
ng.
Yetwhen we conf use the severalmeanings ofa word orphrase –
acci
dental
l
yordeliberat
ely–wear eusingthewor dequi
vocal
ly.
e.
g.ar
ulermayr
efert
oaper
sonwhor
ulesbuti
tmayr
efert
oadev
ice
usedt
o measur
e
b) Amphi bol
y– (Greekmeani
ng– twoinal ump)
.A sent
encemaybe
ambi
guousbecauseoft
hei
rgrammati
calconstr
uct
ion. Astatementi
s
ATTY.NESTORMONDOK 2
Pr
ofessor
,St
atut
oryConst
ruct
ion
COLLEGEOFLAW
UNIVERSI
TYOFTHECORDI LLERAS
amphibol
ous wheni t
smeani ngi si
ndet
er mi
nate becauseoft
hel
oose
and awkward way in which each words are combi
ned. Dangli
ng
par
ti
cipl
eandphrasesoftenpresentamphibol
y.
c) Accent-ambi gui
tycausedbyshif
tingorchangeofemphasi sonasi ngle
wordorphr ase,whosemeani ngdoesnotchange.I thappenst hatinthe
GreeklanguageofAr i
stot
le’
sday ,somewor dsspelledi denti
call
yhad
di
ffer
entmeani ngsdependingonthewayi nwhi chtheywer epronounced,
oraccented.e. g.We should notspeaki llofourf riends.(Fall
acyof
Emphasis).I
fweaccentt hewor d“fr
iend”
,theproposit
ionmi ghtleadtoa
concl
usionthatitisokaytospeakilltoanyoneforaslongast hatperson
i
snoty ourfri
end.
d) Composit
ion–at tri
butesofapartofawholet o t heat t
ri
buteofthe
wholeit
sel
f.E.g.thepar tofanautomobil
eisl
ightt hereforethewhole
automobi
leislight.Itclai
msthatat t
ri
but
esofi ndi
v idualelementsor
membersofacol l
ectionisTheatt
ribut
eofthecol l
ect i
onort otal
i
tyof
thoseel
ements.
e) Di
vi
sion–rev
erseofCompositi
on.
-whatistrueofawhol
e mustalso
betr
ueofit
sparts. Whenonearguesf
rom theatt
ri
but
esofacol
l
ect
ion
ofel
ement
stotheatt
ri
butesoft
hethemsel
ves.
 Unforeseensi
tuati
onsarei
nevi
tabl
e,andnew t
echnol
ogi
esandcul
tur
esmake
appli
cati
onofexist
ingl
awsdi
ff
icul
t.
 Uncert
aint
iesmaybeaddedtothest
atut
einthecourseofenact
ment
,suchas
theneedforcompr
omiseorcat
eri
ngtospeci
ali
nter
estgr
oups.
*Theauthor/softhelaw donothav ethepr e-

sci
enceoftheDelphi
cOracl
et o
l
ookinthef utur
eandpredictwhatexactl
yisgoingtohappen.Themostt
hatwe
canexpectf r
om them i
stheuseoft heirwisdom andexperi
encei
nenacti
nga
l
awandt hei
rhonest,r
easonabl
eandj ustint
enti
oninhelpi
ngbuil
danddevelop
oursoci
ety.
TESTSI
NDETERMI
NINGWHENASTATUTEI
SAMBI
GUOUSREQUI
RING
CONSTRUCTI
ON
1. TESTOFMULTI PLEINTERPRETATI ON–when ast atuei

scapableof
two
ormor er
easonabl
eint
erpr
etat
ionssuchthanmenofcommoni ntell
i
gencemust
necessar
il
yguessatit
smeaninganddiff
erastoit
sappl
icati
on.
2. TESTOFI MPOSSIBI
LITY-whenli
teral
appl
i
cati
oni
si mpossibleor
i
nadequate.
3. TEST OF ABSURDI TY OR UNREASONABLENESS – when a l it

eral
i
nterpret
ation ofa statut
e wouldresul
tto unjust
,unreasonable,absurd,or
mischievousresul
t,orisatvari
ancewi
ththepol
icyofthelegi
slat
ionasawhol e.
(mostspeci al
l
yift
hei nter
pret
ati
onwoulddef
eatthepurposeofthel aw/reason
whyt helawwasmade) .
Theref
ore,thecourtmustt r
yt odeter
mi nehow astatuteshouldbeenforced.Thi
s
requi
res statut
ory constr
ucti
on.I tisat enetofst atut
ory const
ruct
ion thatthe
l
egislat
urei ssupreme( assumingconstituti
onali
ty)whencreatinglaw andt hatt
he
courtismer el
yaninterpr
eterofthelaw.Inpracti
ce,byperf
ormingtheconstr
uct i
ont
he
courtcanmakesweepi ngchangesi ntheoperati
onofthelaw.
ATTY.NESTORMONDOK 3
Pr
ofessor
,St
atut
oryConst
ruct
ion
COLLEGEOFLAW
UNIVERSI
TYOFTHECORDI LLERAS
RULE:ONLYSTATUTESWITH AMBIGUOUSOR DOUBTFULMEANING MAYBETHE
SUBJECTSOFSTATUTORYCONSTRUCTION.Whent
helawiscl
earal
lyouhav
etodo
i
stoapplyt
hel
aw.
LEGALHERMENEUTI CS
- Itisthebranchofsci
encethatestablishest
heprincipl
esandr ul
esof
i
nter
pretati
onandconst r
ucti
onofwr i
ttenlaws.
- I tisthebranchofsci
ence/jur
isprudencewhichest abl
ishesthe
princi
plesandrul
esofinter
pretati
onandconst r
uctionofwr i
tt
enlaws.
*
Her
meneut
ics-Thesci
enceorar
tofconst
ruct
ionandi
nter
pret
ati
on.
- Otherwiseput ,l
egalhermeneuti
csisthesyst
emati
cbodyofr ul
eswhich
arerecognizedasappl i
cabletotheconstr
ucti
onandinter
pret
ati
onoflegal
writ
ings.(Black’sLegalDict
ionar
y,Cent
ennial
ed.Quotedin Diaz,
Stat.
r
d
Con.3 Ed. , 2007atpage11- 12)
EXEGESIS
- Theappl
icat
ionoft
hepr
inci
plesandr
ulesest
abl
i
shedbyl
egal
her
meneuti
cs.
StatutoryConstructi
on LegalHermeneut ics Exegesi
s
Process. Branchofjuri
sprudence. Appl
icati
on of pr i
nci
ples
Seekingt heintent
ionusing Establ
ishthepri
nciplesand andr ulesestabli
shi
nlegal
the pr incipl
es/pr
ocedures rul
es; knowing the her
meneut ics
to be abl etoi nt
erpretor procedures
construct
Goal:Toascer
tai
ntheintent
ionoftheaut hor
softhelaw.
Car
dinal
RuleonSt atutoryConst
ructi
on
- Achievet hegoalofthelaw-pur
poseofthelaw.(
MENSLEGI
SLATORES)
- Ascertaintheint
enti
onoft hefr
amersofthelaw.
For
mul
a:
LAW +FACTS =DECI

SION or (
L+F=D)
MAJORPREMI
SE + MI
NORPREMI
SE =CONCLUSI
ON
Chapter1
STATUTE,LAWS, BI
LLS
Statute-i sanactoft helegislatur

easanor gani
zedbody ;iti
st hewrit
tenwi llofthe
l
egi sl
ature, Expr essedaccor dingtothef orm necessarytoconst i
tut
ei talaw oft he
stateandr ender
ed aut hent
icbycer tai
nprescr i
bedfor
msandsol emnit
ies.
Somet imes,t he ter
m i s mor e broadly def
ined t oi ncl
ude admi nist
rat
ive
regulationsorany enact mentf r
om whatev ersourceoriginat
ing,towhi cht hestate
givesfor ceoflaw.
ATTY.NESTORMONDOK 4
Pr
ofessor
,St
atut
oryConst
ruct
ion
COLLEGEOFLAW
UNIVERSI
TYOFTHECORDI LLERAS
Law-ar uleofconductoror derofsequencewhi chanybei
ngwi l
lnot,oughtnotor
cannot deviat
e.
Elements:rul
e ofconductoror derofsequence,non-devi
ati
on,and,
consequence
(Sancti
on-cer
tai
nkindoffor
ce,impli
eslegi
ti
macyofauthor
it
y)
Bil
l-i
saproposedlaw;dr
aftofal
aw submi
tt
edt
otheconsi
der
ati
onoft
hel
egi
slat
ive
bodyfor adopt
ion
KindsofBi l
ls
1.Appropr i
ationBi l
l
-thepr imaryandspeci f i
cpur posei st oauthori
zet hereleaseoff unds
fr
om t hepubl ictreasury.
2.RevenueBi ll
-onet hatl ev
iest axesandr ai
sesfundsf ort
hegov ernment.
3.Tari
ffBill
-onet hatspeci fi
est heratesordut iestobei mposeoni mpor t
edarticles.
4.Bil
lIncreasingPubl i
cDebt
-one t hataut horizes the gov ernmentt o borrow money ,eitherby
borrowi ng f rom ext ernal sour ces or of f
eri
ng bonds f or publ ic
subscr i
pt i
ons.
5.Bil
lofLocal Applicati
on
-onewhi chi slocali nchar acterliket hecreati
onofnew t own,cit yor
provi
nce.
6.Pri
vateBi l
l
-onet hatwi llnotoper atedi r
ectl
yf orthepublicgoodbutcal cul
at edt o
servegoodwi ll(
e.g.bill
sgr anti
nghonor arymember shi
p).
HOW LAWSAREMADE:(
PROCEDURES)
NOTE:
READSEC.16,
26,
27,
ARTVI oft
hePhi
l
ippi
neConst
it
uti
on.
“
Abi l
lisaproposedlegisl
ati
v emeasur eint
roducedbyamemberormember sof
Congressforenacmentintoal aw.Itissi
gnedbyi tsauthor
/sandfi
l
edwi ththeSecret
ry
ofthe House.I tmay or i
ginatef rom eithert he l
owerorupperHouse,ex cept
APPROPRI ATION,REVENUE,orTARI FF BILLS,BILLS AUTHORI
ZI NG INCREASE OF
PUBLIC DEBT,BI LLS OFLOCALAPPLI CATION,and PRIVATE BILLS shallor
igi
nate
excl
usivel
yint heHouseofRepr esentat
ives”-inwhichcasetheSenatemaypr opose
amendment sorconcurwithamendment s.
STEPS
 Fir
stReadi ng-anymemberofei therhousemaypr esentabi l
l,si
gnedbyhim and
ref
erencet ot hepropercommi tt
ee;pri
ncipalauthormaypr oposetheincl
usions;
thebil
lisreadbyi t
st i
tlenumberandname/ sofaut hor/
s.
 Re ferraltot heAppr opr
iateCommi t
tee-ifdi sapproved,thebil
ldiesa
natural death unless the House deci des ot herwise fol
l
owing the
submi ssi
onoft hereport
.
 Second Readi
ng-t he enti
re bi
l
lisr ead.Debates ensue and changes and
amendmentsarei nser
ted.Thebi l
list henpri
ntedanddi str
ibut
edt oallthe
membersofcongress.I
ff av
oredthebi
l
l i
sf or
war
dedtot heCommi t
teeonRules.
ATTY.NESTORMONDOK 5
Pr
ofessor
,St
atut
oryConst
ruct
ion
COLLEGEOFLAW
UNIVERSI
TYOFTHECORDI LLERAS
 Thi
rdReading-onl
ytheti
tl
eoft
hebi
l
lisr
ead;v
oti
ngt
akespl
ace;maj
ori
tyi
s
suf
fi
cientt
opassthebi
l
l
 Ref
err
altotheOtherHouse-t
hesameproceduretakespl
ace
 Su bmissi
ontoJointBi
camer
alCommittee
 E nrol
l
edBill
/Jour
nal
Not
e:CONFERENCECOMMI
TTEE(
Agpal
o,pp7-
9)
I
ftheot herHouseappr ov est hebi llwit
houtamendement s,thebi l
lispassedby
Congr essandt hesamewi llbet r
ansmi ttedtothepr esi
dentf orappr opriateacti
on.Ifthe
otherHousei ntr
oducesamendment sandt heHousef rom whi chi toriginateddoesnot
agreewi thsaidamendment s,thedi ffer enceswillbesttledbyt heConf er enceCommi tt
e
ofbot hChamber s. ,whoser eportorr ecommendat i
ont hereonwi llhav et obeappr oved
bybot hHousesi nor derthati twi l
lbepassedbyCongr essandt hereaf t
ersentt othe
Presidentforaction.
I
tmaydeal general
ywi t
hthesubj ectmatter
Ther eisnot hingi nt heRul eswhichl i
mitsaconf erencecommi tteet oa
considerati
onofconf li
cti
ngpr ovisions.I tiswithi
nitspowert oi ncludei nitsreportan
enti
relynewpr ovisionthatisnotf oundei t
herintheHouseBi l
lorint heSenat eBil
l.
Ther equirementt hatnobi lshal lbecomeal aw unlessi thaspassedt hr
ee
readi
ngsonsepar ateday sand pr intedcopi est hereofi nitsf inalf orm hav ebeen
dist
ri
but edt othemember st hreeday sbef oreit
spassgedoesnotappl yt oConf er
ence
Commi ttereports.xxxxAl lthatisr equi redisthttheconf er
encecommi tt
eer eportbe
approv edbybot ht heHousesofCongr ess.
AUTHENTI CATI ONOFBI LLS

Beforeanappr ov edbi l
lissenttoPr esi
dentforhisconsiderat
ionasr equiredby
theConst i
tution,thebi llisut henti
cted.Thesy st
em ofaut henti
cati
ondev i
sedi st he
signingbyht heSpeakerandt heSenat ePressi
dentofthepr i
ntedcopy oftheapprov erd
bill
,certi
fi
edbyt her espect i
vesecretari
esofbot hHouses,t osignif
yt othePr esident
thatt hebillbeingpr esent edtohi m hasbeendul yapprovedbyt he l egi
slat
ureandi s
readyf orhisappr oval orrejecti
on.
Note: thi
sauthent
icat
ioni
sveryimport
antinr
esolvi
ngt
hei
ssue:whi
chwi
l
l
pr
evai
li
ncaseofconf
li
ctbetweentheenr
oll
edbil
landthej
ournal
.
ENROLLEDBI LLVS.JOURNAL
Enrol
l
edbi l
listhatwaspassedbyCongr
ess,aut
hent
icat
edbyt
heSpeakerand
theSenat
ePresident
.
Pri
nci
pleoftheenrol
ledbil
l-thet extoftheActaspassedandapprov
edis
deemedimporti
ngabsol
utev
erit
yandisbindungonthecour
ts.
Theenroll
edcopyofthebil
lisconclusi
venotonl
yofit
sprov
isi
onsbutal
soi
ts
dueenact
ment.
Enr
oll
edBil
lDoctr
ine-t
hesi gni
ngofabil
lbytheSpeakeroft
heHouseandthe
SenatePresi
dentandthecert
if
icati
onoftheSecret
ari
esofbothHousesofCongr
ess
thati
twaspasssedareconcl
usi
v eofit
sdueenact
ment.
Reason:Thereasonanenr oll
edbilli
sacccor
dedconclusiv
ev er
ituli
esinthefact
thattheenroll
edbil
lcarriesonitsf aceaslemnasssurancebyt helegisl
atv
eandt hw
executi
ve depart
ment s oft he government,char
ged respev
tiv
ely withthe dutyof
enavti
ngandexecutingthel aws,thatiti
spasssedbytheassembl y
.Ther espectt
oco-
ATTY.NESTORMONDOK 6
Pr
ofessor
,St
atut
oryConst
ruct
ion
COLLEGEOFLAW
UNIVERSI
TYOFTHECORDI LLERAS
equalandi
ndependentdepar
tment
sr equi
resthej
udici
aldepart
menttoactuponthat
assur
anceandtoacceptashavi
ngpassedbytheassembly
,allbi
l
ldul
yaut
henti
cat
ed.
GENERALRULE
I
ncaseofconf
lctbet
weent
heenr
oll
l
edbi
l
landt
hel
egi
slat
ivej
our
nal
s,i
tist
he
f
ormerthatwi
l
lpr
evai
l
.
EXCEPTI ON
Exceptast omat tersthatt heConst i
tit
ionrequirest obeent eredi nt
hej ournals,
suchast hey easamdnay sont hefinalreadingoft hebi lloronanyquest ionatt he
requestofatl east1/ 5oft hemembet soft heHouse,t heobj ecti
onsoft hePresidentto
avetoedbi l
loritem,andt henamesoft hemember svotingf ororagainstoverri
dinghis
veto.
Withdrawal ofauthent i
city
Thewi thdrawaloft her espect
ivesignat ur
esofeschheadoft heHousesqoul d
renderthebi l
lwithoutattestationandwoul dnul l
li
fystatusoft hebi
lladanr nr
olll
edbi l
l.
i
nsuchcase,t hebil
lisnol ongeraccor dedabsol utever i
tyadr egardsitst
extandt he
entri
esint hejuornalshouldbeconsul ted.
Case:Ar
roy
ovs.deVenenci
a,277SCRA268(
1997)
 Submi
ssi
ont
othePr
esi
dent
Thr
ee(
3)way
swhenabi
llbecomesal
aw:
1.ThePr
esi
dentappr
ovest
heenr
oll
edbi
l
l.
2.Over
ri
dingofv etoBY2/ 3VOTESOFCONGRESS
Thebil
ltogehterwiththereason/sforthevetoshal
lber et
urnedtotheHouse
oforiginwhereitwi l
ldecidewhetherornot t oov er
ridethev eto(2/ 3votesofthe
member softheHouseofor igi
nisrequir
edtoov err
idetheveto).Theni twi
llbesentto
theotherHousewher ei twi
llunder
got hesamepr ocesstoov er
ridethev et
o(2/3votes
ofthemember soft hi
sHousei sli
kewiserequir
ed)
3.Non-acti
onoft hepr
esi
dent
I
faf t
erthelapseof30daysfrom t
hesubmissi
onoft heappr
ovedbil
ltothe
Off
iceoft hePresident
,theChi
efExecut
ivedi
dactonit(et
iherapprov
esitnorv
etoesit
),
t
hent hebillbecomesal aw.
Di
ff
erentKindsofSt atut
es:
1.AstoNat ure
-PenalStatut
es
-RemedialStatut
es D’
Denci
o’sCode
-Substanti
veStatut
es
-LaborStatut
es N-at
ure
-TaxStatutes
A-ppl
i
cat
ion
2.Ast
oAppl i
cati
on
-Mandatory P-er
for
mance
-Di
rector
y
3.Ast
oPer f
ormance
-Per
manent
-Temporar
y
ATTY.NESTORMONDOK 7
Pr
ofessor
,St
atut
oryConst
ruct
ion
COLLEGEOFLAW
UNIVERSI
TYOFTHECORDI LLERAS
4.Ast
oScope
-Gener
al
-Speci
al
5.Ot
herCl
assif
icat
ion
-Ast
atutecoul
dei
therbeprospect
iveorret
roact
ive
-Ast
atutecoul
dei
therberepeal
ingactoranamendatory
-Ast
atutecoul
dei
therberefer
encestat
uteoradeclar
ator
yst
atut
e
FUNCTI
ONSOFLAW:
Ingeneral
,itregulat
eshumanconduct;pr
omoti
onofthecommongood,peace
andorder,soci
alengineeri
ng,soci
alv
alueset
c.(
see.I
ntr
oduct
iont
oLegalPhi
l
osophy
byPascual)
i. Defi
nestherightsandduti
esofci
ti
zens(setst
heli
mitsofhumanconduct)
i
i. Imposestaxes
i
i
i. Appropr
iat
ef unds
i
v. Defi
nescrimesandpr ov
idesf
orthei
rpunishment
v. Creat
esandabol i
shesgover
nmentoffi
ces;deter
minesthei
rjur
isdi
cti
on
andfuncti
ons
PARTSOFALAW:
1.TITLE-giv
esagener alstat
ementof ,andcal
lsatt enti
ont othesubjectmat terofan
actsothat legislat
orsandt hepublicmay beappr aisedoft hesubjectmat terofthe
l
egisl
ati
on,andbe putuponi nquir
yregardi
ngthereto.
-Thatwhichexpressesthesubjectmat terofthel
aw.I tcanhel pi
nthe
constr
ucti
on(int
erpretati
on)ofstat
utesbutiti
snotcont r
oll
ingandnotent it
ledtomuch
weight
.
2.PREAMBLE-ist hepartofthest atutefol

lowi ngthet it
leandprecedi
ngt heenact
ing
cl
ause,whi
chstatesthereasonsf orortheobj ecti
veoft heenact
ment .I
tcannotenl
arge
orconf
erpowers,orcureinher
entdef ectsi
nt hestatute.
Point
storemember :
- Apreambledoesnotcr eatear i
ghtnordoesi tgrantanyri
ght
- I
tisnotasourceofgov ernmentpower
- I
tisnotanessentialpartofast at
ute
3.ENACTINGCLAUSE-t hepartwhichi
ndicat
estheauthor
itywhichpromulgatedt
he
enactment
.Theenactingcl
auseisnotessenti
altot
hev al
idi
tyofthelawbutthisclause
clot
hsthestatuewithcert
aindigni
tybecausethespecif
icauthori
tythatpromulgated
thelawist
hereinst
ated.
4.BODY-itcont
ainst
hesubj
ectmatt
erofthest
atut
e.Thebodyofthest
atueshoul
d
embraceonlyonesubj
ectmat
terasr
equir
edbytheConsti
tut
ion.
5.EXCEPTI
ONANDPROVI SIONS-thepartwhichactsasarestr
aintuponorasa
qual
i
ficat
ionoft
hegener
ali
tyofthelanguagewhichi
tfoll
ows.
6.I
NTERPRETATIVECLAUSE-thepartofthest
atut
ewheret
hel
egi
slat
uredef
inesi
ts
own languageandpr
escr
ibesr
ulesf
orit
sconst
ruct
ion.
ATTY.NESTORMONDOK 8
Pr
ofessor
,St
atut
oryConst
ruct
ion
COLLEGEOFLAW
UNIVERSI
TYOFTHECORDI LLERAS
7.REPEALI
NGCLAUSE-t hepartwhichannouncest
hel
egi
slat
ivei
ntentt
oter
minat
e,
rev
oke orr
epeal
anotherst
atut
e/s.
8.SAVINGCLAUSE-t
hepar
twhichrest
rict
st her
epeali
ngactandpreser
vesex
ist
ing
power
s, ri
ght
spendi
ngpr
oceedi
ngfrom theef
fectofther
epeal
.
9.SEPARABILI
TYCLAUSE-i tisacl
ausewhichstatesthatforanyr
eason,anysect
ion
or pr ov
isi
onsoft hestat
uteisheldtobeunconst it
uti
onalorrev
oked,theother
sect
ionor pr ov
isi
onofthelawshal
lnotbeaff
ected.
Pointstor emember :
- A separ abil
it
ycl ause cr
eatesa pr esumpt ion thatt hel egisl
aturei nt
ended a
separabi l
i
tyratherthancompl et
enul lit
yoft hest atute.Thismeanst hatifone
partoft hestatuteisvoi
dorunconst i
tutional
, theot herparts,whichar evali
dmay
sti
llstand.ThisistheGENERALr ule.
- Thegener alr
ule,however
, i
ssubj
ectt othel i
mi tat
iont hatifthepar tofthestat
ute
aresomut uallydependentandconnect edt herebycr eat i
ngabel iefthatthe
l
egislatureintendedthem asawhol e,thenullityorconst i
tutionali
tyofonepar t
mayv i
olatetherest.
10.DATEOFEFFECTI
VITY-speci
fi
est
hedat
eandt
imewhent
hel
awt
akesef
fect
.
SOURCESOFLAW:
 Constit
uti
on
 Stat
uteenactedbyCongress
 Decreesissuedundert
he1973Const
it
uti
on
 Deci
sionofCour t
s
THETHREE(
3) DEPARTMENTS(
BRANCHES)OFGOVERNMENT
1.EXECUTIVE
-vestedinthepresi
dent
;administ
erl
aws,car
ryi
ngt
hem i
ntopr
act
icaloper
ati
on
and enf orci
ngthei
rdueobservance
2.LEGI
SLATIVE
-powert
omake,al
terorrepeall
aws
-vest
edinabi
cameralCongress
3.JUDI
CIARY
-powert
oint
erpr
etandappl
ythelaws
-vest
edinoneSupremeCourtandsuchl
owercour
tsasmaybeest
abl
i
shedby
l
aw
PRI
NCIPLES:
 CheckandBal ance( maint
ainequi l
i
bri
um)
-Lawmaki ngpowerofCongr esssubj
ecttovetopowerofthepresident
,whi
chin
turnmaybeov err
idden(avoidhastyandimprovi
dentl
egi
slat
ion,
i.
e.Hodgepodge
andlog-roll
inglegisl
ati
on)
-Congressmayr efuset o giveconcur
rencetoanamnest ygrantedortreat
y
enter
edi ntobyt hepresi
dent
-Judi
cialreview
ATTY.NESTORMONDOK 9
Pr
ofessor
,St
atut
oryConst
ruct
ion
COLLEGEOFLAW
UNIVERSI
TYOFTHECORDI LLERAS
 SeparationofPower s-Thepur posei stopr eventt heconcentrat
ionofaut hori
tyin
oneper sonorgr oupt hatmi ghtleadt oani rr
eversibleer
rororabusei nitsexerci
se.
(Absolutepowercor ruptsabsol utely
.)
JusticeLaur el
:
“Tosecureact i
on,tof orestal
loveract i
on,topreventdespot i
sm (
absolute
power ) andt oobtai
nef fi
ciency”
Const it
uti
on:
Thet hreebr anchesar eentrusted with each oft hei
rpower sar enot
permi tt
edt o encroachupont hepower sofconf i
dedtotheot hers.
 Non-delegabilit
yofPower s
-Whathasbeendel egatedcannotbedel egated.
-Del egatedpowerconst i
tutesnotonl yar ightbutalsoadut ytobeper f
ormed
bythedel egatet hrought heinstrumentalit
yofhi sownjudgement .
THETESTOFVALI
DDELEGATI
ON
a.)CompletenessTest
Lawsmustbecompl et
einalli
tsessent
ialt
ermsandcondi
ti
onsso
thatt
herewillbenot
hingl
eftf
orthedel
egatetoexceptt
oenf
orcei
t.
b.)Suf
ficiencyofSt andardTest
Indi cat
est hecircumstanceswhicht hepol
ici
esaretobepursued
andimpl ement ed.Limitsandprovi
despar ameter
sofdiscr
eti
on;pur
pose
i
st oprev enttotaltr
ansferenceoflegi
slat
ivepowerfrom t
helaw-maki
ng
bodytothedel egate.
THEPOWEROFTHEJUDI
CIARYTOI
NTERPRET
Const
ruct
ioni
saj
udi
cialf
unct
ion
Thedutyandpowert
oint
erpr
etandconst
rueast
atut
eort
heConst
it
uti
oni
sa
j
udi
cialf
unct
ion.
I
tisthecourtthathasthefinalwor
dast
owhatt
hel
aw means.Thel
egi
slat
ure
cannotover
rul
ejudi
cial
const
ruct
ion.
WHENJUDI
CIALI
NTERPRETATI
ONMAYBESETASI
DE:
1.TheSupr emeCour tinanappr opri

atecase,changeorov errulei t
spr evious
construct
ion
2.Ther ulethatthesupr emecour thast hefinalwor dinthei nterpret
ationor
construct
ion ofa st at
utemerelymeanst hatthelegisl
atur
ecannot ,byl aw
orresoluti
on, modi fyorannulthejudi
cialconstructi
onwithoutmodi f
y i
ngor
repeali
ngt heverystatutewhichhasbeent hesubj ectofconst ructi
on.Byso
amendi ngorrepeali
ngt hestat
utesthusconstrued,theconsequenceofwhi ch
i
st hatthepreviousjudici
alconstr
ucti
onismodi fiedorsetasi deaccor dingly
.
(SEPARATI ONOFPOWER-POWEROFTHELEGI SLATURETOMAKE,AMEND
ORREPEALLAWS. )
WHENEXERCI
SED:
Thecour tdoesnoti
nter
pretal awinavacuum.Itconst
ruesorappliesthelaws
basedonf act
sandt helaw i
nvolvedasitdeci
desconcreteorcontrover
tedcase.The
SupremeCour tconst
ruest
heappl i
cablel
awincontrov
ersieswhichareri
pef orj
udici
al
resol
ution.Theremustbeanact ualcontr
over
sy.
ATTY.NESTORMONDOK 10
Pr
ofessor
,St
atut
oryConst
ruct
ion
COLLEGEOFLAW
UNIVERSI
TYOFTHECORDI LLERAS
Not
e:Decl
arat
oryr
eli
ef:
Rul
e63
Secion1.Whomayf il
epet iti
on.-Anyper soninterest
edunderadeed,wi ll
,
contractoe ot herwritt
en instrument ,orwhose r ght
s are aff
ected bya statut
e,
executiv
eor der
orregulat
ion,or dinance,oranyot hergovernmentalregul
ati
onmay ,
befr
oebr eachorv iol
ati
ont hereof ,brnganact i
oni ntheappropriateRegi
onaltri
al
Courtt o det er
mine any quest ion ofconst r
ucti
on orv ali
dit
y arisi
ng,and fora
declarat
ionofhi sr
ight
sordut ies, t
hereunder
.
Itdoesnotgi
velegalopi
niononhy
pot
het
icalcasesori
ncaseswhi
chhav
ebecome
mootandacademic.
Mootandacademic-
whenit
spurposehasbecomest
aleorwher
enopr
act
icalr
eli
ef
canbegrant
edorwhichcanhavenopract
ical
eff
ect
.
Except
ions(
mootandacademi
c)
a)I
fiti
scapableofrepl
eti
on,
yetevadi
ngrev
iew;
b)Whentherender
ingofadecisi
ononthemerit
swoul
dbeofpr
act
ical
val
ue
LI
MITATI
ONSONTHEPOWERTOCONSTRUE:
Ther
emustbeanact
ualcont
rov
ersy
:
1. ONLYPOWERI
STOASCERTAI
NTHEI
NTENTI
ONOFTHEAUTHORSOFTHE
LAW WHI
CHPRESUPPOSESTHEPRESENCEOFAMBI
GUI
TY
Thef
irstandfundamentaldut
yoft hecourtist
oapplythelaw.Constr
uct
ion
andi
nterpr
etat
ioncomesonlyafterithasbeendemonst
rat
edt hatappl
i
cat
ion
i
simpossibl
eorinadequat
ewithoutit.
I
nconst r
uingastat
ute,
iti
snotenoughtoascertai
ntheint
enti
onormeaning
ofthestatute;
iti
sal
sotoseewhethertheintent
ionorthemeaninghasbeen
expressedinsuchawayastogivei
tlegal
effectandval
idi
ty.
Elementar
yist herulethatwhent helaw i
sclear,iti
si ncumbentuponthe
j
udgetoapplythem regardl
essofpersonalbeli
eforpredi
lecti
ons-whenthelaw
i
s unambiguous and unequivocal
,appli
cati
on notinter
pretati
on t
heref
oreis
i
mperati
ve.
Wher ethel
awisf r
eefrom ambigui
ty,thecourtmaynoti ntr
oduceexceptions
orcondi t
ionswherenoneisprovi
dedf r
om consi derationofconveni
ence, publi
c
welfareorf oranyl audabl
epur poses,normayi tengr aftint
ot hel aw the
qualif
icati
ons notcontemplated norconst rue it
s pr ovi
sion by taki
ng into
accountquestionsofexpediency,goodf ait
h,practicaluti
li
tyandot hersimil
ar
reasonssoast orelaxnoncompli
ancet herewit
h.
It mustbeappl
i
edr
egar
dlessofwhomaybeaf
fect
ed,
eveni
fthel
awmay
behar
shoroner
ous.
*Cour
tscannotchanget
hel
awunderthegui
seofinter
pretat
ionandenlar
ge
t
hescopeofthestat
ueandi
ncl
udet
her
einsi
tuat
ionsnotpr
ovidedorint
endedby
t
hel
awmakers.
Pr
ofessor
,St
atut
oryConst
ruct
ion
COLLEGEOFLAW
UNIVERSI
TYOFTHECORDI LLERAS
Iti
snotwi thi
nthepr
ovinceoft
heCour
ttoinqui
reintothewi
sdom ofthel
aw
f
orindeed,court
sareboundbythewor
dsofthestatue.Thelawisappl
iedasit
i
s.
Thecour
tcannotbemadet oacceptani
nter
pret
ati
ont
hatwoul
ddef
eatt
he
i
ntentofthel
awandi t
slegi
slat
ors.
*WHENCAN YOUSAYTHATTHELAW I
SCLEAR?(
SeeTest
sofAmbi
gui
ty)
CONFLI
CTSBETWEENSOURCESOFLAW
Wherelegislat
ionandcasel awar ei
nconf l
ict
,therei
sapr esumpti
ont hatlegi
slati
on
takespr ecedencei nsofarast hereisanyi nconsist
ency.IntheUnitedKi ngdom t hi
s
princi
pleisknownasPar l
iament ar
ySov erei
gnty.I
nAust r
ali
aandi ntheUni t
edSt ates,
thecourtshav econsistentl
ystatedthatthetextofthestat
uteisusedfir
st,anditi
sr ead
asi ti
swr i
tten,usi
ngt heordi
narymeani ngofthewor dsofthestat
ute.
 "
[I
]ni
nter
pret
ingast
atut
eacour
tshoul
dal
way
stur
ntoonecar
dinalcanon
befor eal lot hers.... [
C]our tsmustpr esumet hatal egislaturesay si nast at ut e
whati tmeansandmeansi nast at utewhati tsay st here."Connect icutNat '
l
Bankv .Ger mai n,112S.Ct .1146,1149( 1992) .Indeed," whent hewor dsofa
statutear eunambi guous,t hen,t hi sf ir
stcanoni sal sot hel ast:' j
udi cialinqui ryi s
[
1]
compl ete. '
"
 "Af undament al ruleofst atutoryconst ructionr equi rest hatev er ypar tofast at ute
bepr esumedt ohav esomeef fect ,andnotbet reat edasmeani ngl essunl ess
absol utelynecessar y."RavenCoalCor p.v .Absher ,153Va.332, 149S. E.541
(1929) .
 "I
n assessi ng st atut oryl anguage,unl ess wor ds hav e acqui r
ed a pecul iar
meani ng,byv ir
tueofst atut or
ydef i
ni t
ionorj udi cialconst ruction,t heyar et obe
const ruedi naccor dancewi t
ht heircommonusage. "Mul lerv .BPExpl orat ion
(Alaska)I nc.,923P. 2d783, 787- 88( Alaska1996) ;
 "Thepr i
nci palcommand ofst at utor yconst ruct ion ist hatt hecour tshoul d
determi neandef fect uatet hei ntentoft hel egi slat ureusi ngt hepl ainl anguage
oft hest atut east hepr i
mar yindi cat orofl egi slativei ntent "St
. atev .Ogden,118
N.M.234,242,880P. 2d845,853( 1994)“ Thewor dsofast at ute...shoul dbe
givent hei ror di
nar ymeani ng,absentcl earandexpr essl egisl ati
v ei nt
ent i
ont o
thecont rary ,
”asl ongast heor dinar ymeani ngdoes“ notr endert hest atut e’s
appl i
cat ionabsur d,unr easonabl e,orunj ust ”St
. at ev .Rowel l
, 121N. M.111, 114,
908 P. 2d 1379,1382 ( 1995)When t hemeani ng ofa st at utei suncl earor
ambi guous, wehav er ecogni zedt hati tis“ thehi ghdut yandr esponsi bili
tyoft he
j
udi cialbr anch ofgov ernmentt of acili
tate and pr omot et he l egislatur e’s
accompl ishmentofi tspur pose. ”St ateexr el.Hel manv .Gal l
egos, 117N. M.346,
353, 871P. 2d1352, 1359( 1994) .-NewMexi cov .Juan, 2010- NMSC- 041,August
9,2010
Feder aljurisdict i
onsmaypr esumet hateitherfeder alorlocalgov ernment
authori
typrev ail
si nt heabsenceofadef inedr ule.InCanada,t herearear easofl aw
wherepr ovi
ncialgov er nment sandt hefeder algov er
nmenthav econcur rentjuri
sdicti
on.
Inthesecasest hef eder allaw ishel dt obepar amount .Howev er
,inar easwher et he
Canadian const i
t ut
ion issi lent,t hefeder algov er
nmentdoesnotnecessar il
yhav e
superi
orj ur
isdict
ion.Rat her ,anar eaofl awt hatisnotexpr essl yment i
onedi nCanada' s
Consti
tution wi l
lhav et o be i nt er
preted t of allunderei t
hert he f
ederalr esidual
j
urisdi
cti
onf oundi ns.91- -knownast hePeace,Or derandGoodGov er
nmentcl ause--
ortheprov i
ncesr esidualj uri
sdicti
onof" Proper t
yandCi vilRights"unders.92( 10)oft he
1867Const ituti
onAct .Thi scont rastswi thot herfederalj
urisdicti
ons,notablytheUni ted
Pr
ofessor
,St
atut
oryConst
ruct
ion
COLLEGEOFLAW
UNIVERSI
TYOFTHECORDI LLERAS
Stat
esandAustral
i
a,whereitispresumedt hatiflegi
slat
ioni
snotenact
edpursuantt
oa
speci
ficpr
ovisi
onofthef ederalConstit
ution,thestateswillhav
eauthor
it
yov erthe
rel
evantmatt
erint
hei
rrespectivej
urisdi
cti
ons.
*
**I
NTHEPHI
LIPPI
NES,
sol
uti
ont
hispr
obl
em shoul
dber
elat
edt
othePr
ici
pleof
STAREDECISI
S-
“The maxi m STARE DECI SI S ET NON QUI ETA NON MOVERE (f ollow past
precedent sandnott odisturbwhathasbeenset tled)isembodi edi nAr ti
cle8oft heCivi
l
Codewhi chpr ovi
dest hat“ [
j]
udicialdeci sionsappl yi
ngori nt erpr eti
ngt hel awsort he
Constituti
onshal lform partoft hl egalsy stem oft hePhilippi nes”I tisbasedont he
pri
cipl
et hatonceaquest i
onofl aw hasbeenexami nedanddeci ded,i gshoul dbe
deemedset tl
edandcl osedt of urt
herar gument.Thepr i
nci
pl ei soneofpol icygr ounded
on thenecessi t
yf orsecur ing cer tainty and st abil
i
tyinj udi cialdeci sions.LEGI S
INTERPRETAI OLEGI SVIM OBTI NETort hei nt
erpretat
ionplacedupont hewr i
ttenlawby
acompet entcourthast hef orceofl aw.TheSupr emeCour tisdescr i
bedashav ingthe
l
astwor donwhatt hel aw is,asi tist hef i
nalarbit
erofanyj ust iciabl
econt roversy.As
such,lowercour tsareenjoinedt ofol lowt hedecisionoftheSupr emeCour t.”
I
nter
nalandext
ernalconsi
stency
Not
e-seepr
esumpt
ionagai
nsti
nconsi
stency
Itispr esumedt hatast atutewi l

lbei nterpretedsoast obei nt ernall
yconsistent .A
parti
cularsect i
onoft hest atuteshal lnotbedi vorcedf rom t her estoft heact .The
ejusdem gener is(Latinfor" ofthesameki nd" )r
uleappliest or esol vetheproblem of
givi
ngmeani ngt ogr oupsofwor dswher eoneoft hewor dsi sambi guousorinher ently
unclear.Ther ul eresultst hatwher e" generalwor dsf ol
l
ow enumer ati
onsofpar ti
cul ar
classesorper sonsort hings,thegener alwor dsshal
lbeconst r uedasappl i
cableonl yt o
personsort hingsoft hesamegener alnat ureorkindast hoseenumer at
ed."49F.Supp.
846,859.Thus,i nast atutef or
biddingt heconceal mentonone' sper sonof" pistols,
revolvers,der
ringers,orot herdanger ousweapons, "theter m"danger ousweapons"may
beconst r
uedt ocompr ehendonl ydanger ousweaponsoft heki ndenumer ated,i .
e.,
fi
rearms, orper hapsmor enar r
owlyst i
ll,handguns.Her e,theter m" dangerousweapons"
mustbegi venameani ngoft he"sameki nd"ast hewor dofest abl ishedmeani ng.
Astatut
eshal lbeinterpretedsoasNOTt obeinconsi
stentwithotherst
atutes.
Wherethereisani nconsistency,thejudici
arywil
lattempttoprov i
deahar monious
i
nter
pretat
ion.
(Rul
ei sHARMONI ZEdif
ferentlaws(ol
dornew)wi t
ht hesamesubj ect
matt
er).
HARMONI
ZINGSTATUTES
Theruleisthatast
atuteshoul dbesoconst ruednotonlytobeconsi st
entwithitsel
fbut
al
sot oharmonizewit
hot herlawsoft hesamesubj ect,astoform acomplete,coherent
andintel
l
igi
blesyst
em....
..everystat
utemustbesoconst r
uedandhar monizewithot her
stat
uteastof or
m auniform system ofjur
isprudence.(
Republicvs.Asunci
on,231SCRA
211)
Stat
utesinparimateri
ashouldbeconstruedt
oattai
nthepurposeofanexpress
nati
onalpol
icy.Fortheassumpti
onisthatwhenev
erthelegi
slati
veenact
aalaw,ithas
i
nmi ndthepreviousstat
utesrel
ati
ngt
ot hesamesubjectmatter,
andinthwabsenceof
Pr
ofessor
,St
atut
oryConst
ruct
ion
COLLEGEOFLAW
UNIVERSI
TYOFTHECORDI LLERAS
anexpressrepealoramendment,t
henewlawisdeemedenact
edinaccordwit
ht he
l
egisl
ati
vepolicyembodi
edinthesepr
iorst
atut
es.(
Coronav
s.CourtofAppeal
s,214
SCRA378( 1993)
"Provi
sionsi nanactwhi char eomi tt
edi nanotheractr el
atingtot hesamesubj ect
mat t
erwi l
l beappl iedinapr oceedingundert heot heractwhennoti nconsistentwi ti
ts
purpose.Pr iorstatutesr el
atingtot hesamesubj ectmat teraret obecompar edwi ththe
newpr ov i
sions, andi fpossiblebyr easonabl econstructi
on, botharetobeconst rued
thateff
ecti sgi vent oeverypr ovisi
onofeach.St atutesinpar imateri
a,alt
houghi n
apparentconf lict,aresof arasr easonabl ypossibleconstruedt obei nharmonywi th
eachot her.(Vda.deUr banov s.GSI A,
G. R.No.137904, Oct.19, 2001.Cit
edi nRuben
Agpalo, SyatutoryConst ruction,p.378, SixthEd.,1990,publishedbyRexBookSt or e)
St
atement
soft
hel
egi
slat
ure
Legi
slati
vebodiesthemselv
esmayt rytoinfl
uenceorassi
stthecourtsinint
erpr
eti
ng
thei
rlawsbyplacingint
othelegi
slat
ionitsel
fst
atementst
othateffect.These
provi
sionshav
emanydi f
fer
entnames, butarety
pical
l
ynotedas:
 Fi
ndings;
 Declar
ati
ons,
sometimessuff
ixedwihofPol
t icyorofInt
ent;
or
 SenseofCongress,
orofei
therhouseinmul
ti
-chamberbodi
es.
Not
e:SeeI
nter
pret
ati
vecl
ause.
Theseprovi
sionsoft
hebi
llsimplygivethel
egisl
atur
e'sgoal
sanddesir
edeffect
softhe
l
aw, andar
econsider
ednon-substant
iveandnon-enf
orceabl
einandofthemselv
es.
CHAPTERI
I
I
NTERPRETATI
ONANDCONSTRUCTI
ON
Rule:In det
ermining the int
enti
on ofthe l
egi
slatur
e,courtsshoul
dr esortfi
rstto
i
nterpr
etat
ion
(usi
ngintr
insicai
ds)bef or
eresor
ti
ngtoconstructi
on(usi
ngextr
insi
caids)
.
Not
hi ngwr ongifweusethetwomet hodsatthesamet i
me-sincebothof
them arer esor
tedt of or thesamepur pose-ascertai
nthei nt
enti
onoft he
author
soft helaw.
SPEECHI
Reason: STHEI
NDEXOFI
NTENTI
ON
TWOPROCESSESOFASCERTAI
NINGTHEI
NTENTI
ONOFTHELEGI
SLATURE
A)I
NTERPRETATI
ON
B)CONSTRUCTI
ON
Pr
ofessor
,St
atut
oryConst
ruct
ion
COLLEGEOFLAW
UNIVERSI
TYOFTHECORDI LLERAS
Thesetwoprocesses,i
nter
pret
ationandconstr
uct
ion,havethesameobj
ector
purposeandt
hatis: ascer
tai
ningthei
ntentoft
hel
egisl
atur
e.
Thecardi
nalr
uleint
heinterpret
ati
onofal
ll
awsi
stoascer
tai
n,andgi
veef
fectt
o
thei
ntentoft
helaw(Agpalo,page107)
Thepurposeofallrul
esormaxi mistodiscovert
hetrueint
enti
onofthel
aw.
Theyareonlyvaluabl
ewhent heysub-
servethispur
pose.(Ci
tyofBagui
ov s.
Marcos,GRNo.26100,Febr
uar
y28,1969,27SCRA342;82CJSpage526)
I
n deter
mini
ng the i
ntenti
on ofthe legi
slat
ure,cour
tsshoul
dresor
tfi
rstt
o
i
ntr
insi
caidbef
oreresort
ingtoext
rinsi
caid.
I
. INTERPRETATI
ON- theactorprocessofascer
tai
ningt
hei
ntent
ionoft
he
author
/soft
helawusi
ngint
ri
nsicaid.
-ist
heartoffi
ndi
ngthetr
uesenseandmeani
ngofwor
d/swi
thoutgoi
ngbey
ond
thecont
extoft
hestat
ute.
Thepr
ocessofdi
scover
ingt
het
ruemeani
ngoft
hel
anguageused. I
tisl
i
mit
ed
t
oexpl
ori
ngthewri
tt
entext
.
*Thecour tr
esortst oi nt
erpr
etati
onwheni tseekstoascert
ainthemeaningofa
wordfoundinast atutebecausesuchwor d,whenconsideredwithotherwordsused
i
nthestatutemayr ev ealameani ngdif
ferentfr
om thatwhichseemedappar ent
whensuchwor disconsi deredabstr
actl
y,whengivenitsusualmeaning,orapar
t
f
rom t
her estofthet ext.(vi
ewedi ni
solat
ion)
Iti
stheartoff
indi
ngthetr
uesenseandmeani ngofwor d/
swi t
houtgoi
ng
beyondthecont
extofthest
atut
e.Ituti
l
izesint
ri
nsi
caids(thosefoundinthel
awit
sel
f)
e.
g. mannerinwhichthewordswer ewrit
tenorar
ranged,
punctuati
onsetc..
*
INTRI
NSI
C AI
D–t
hosef
oundi
nthest
atut
eit
sel
f
-Inter
pret
ati
onut
il
izesi
ntr
insi
cai
ds(
thosepr
esenti
nthel
awi
tsel
f)
,whi
char
eas
foll
ows:
a.Ti
tl
e-expr
essest
hesubj
ectmat
teroft
hel
aw
b.Pr
eambl
e-st
atest
her
easonsandobj
ect
ivesoft
heenact
ment
c.Punctuati
on-maybeusedasanaddi t
ionalar gumentforadoptingt he
li
ter
almeaningoft hewordst huspunct uatedbutcannev ercont
rolagainst
theint
ell
igi
blemeani ngofawr it
tenwor d.
-itisanai dofl owdegr eeini nterpreti
ngthelanguageofa
statut
e
andcannev ercontrolagai nsttheintell
igibl
emeani ngofawr i
tten
word.
Howev er
,ifthepunctuationofast atutegi vesitameaningt hatis
reasonableand
i
nappar entaccordwi tht helegisl
ati
v ewi ll
,itmaybeusedasan
additi
onal
Pr
ofessor
,St
atut
oryConst
ruct
ion
COLLEGEOFLAW
UNIVERSI
TYOFTHECORDI LLERAS
ar
gumentf
oradopt
ing t
he l
i
ter
almeani
ng oft
he wor
ds t
hus
punct
uat
ed.
d.Words,Phrases, SentencesandCont ext-theint

ent
ionmustpr i
mar i
lybe
deter
minedfrom t helanguageoft hestatuteandsuchlanguageconsistof
thewords,phrasesandsent encesusedt herei
n.Themeani ngoft helaw
shoul
d,howev er,bet akenf rom t
hegener alconsi
der
ationofthelawasa
wholeandnotf rom anysi nglepart
/porti
onorsectionorf rom isolat
ed
words,phr
asesandsent encesused.
e.Headi ngsandMar ginalNotes-deter

minest hescopeoft hepr
ovi
sions
andt hei
rr el
ati
ontoot herport
ionsoftheact ,howev er
,ifthemeani
ngof
thestatuteorifit
stextisclear
, i
twil
lprev
ailasagai nsttheheadi
ng,
ifthe
l
atterhasbeenpr eparedbycompi ler
sandnott helegisl
ature.
f.Legi
slat
iveDef i
niti
onandI nter pretation-def i
nitionoft helegislatureof
thewordsusedi nthest at ureandt heconst r
uct i
ont obeplacedt hereon.
Therul
esar easf oll
ows:
-Ifalawpr ovidest hati ncaseofdoubt ,itshoul dbeconst ruedand
i
nter pret edi
nacer tainmannert hatt hecour tsshoul df ol
lowsuchi nstructions.
-I
ncaseofconf li
ctbet weent hei nterpretationclausesand t he
l
egisl ative meani ng,asr evealedbyt hest at utewhenconsi der
edi nitst otal
ity
,
thelat tershal
l prev
ail
.
-At ermi susedt hr oughoutt hest atuteint hesamesensei ti sfir
st
defined.
-Legi slati
ve definition in si milart erms on t he statute may be
resolv edt o,except ,whereapar ticularl awexpr esslydecl aresthatitsdef init
ion
thereini s l i
mitedi napplicat
iont othest atutesi nwhi cht heyappear .
DI
FFERENTPARTSOFALAW
Not
e:t
hedi
ff
erentpar
tsofast
atut
ear
eint
ri
nsi
cai
ds
A)TITLE:Thatpar toft
hest at
utewhi chgi v
esagener alstat
ementof,andcal
ls
attent
ionto, thesubject mat terofanact ,sot hatthelegi
slat
orsandthepubli
c
maybeappr aisedofthesubjectmat t
erofthel egi
slati
on,andbeputuponinquiry
i
nr egardther eto.
Itexpr essesthesubjectmat terofthelaw
Itcanhelpi nt heconstr
ucti
onofst atut
esbuti tisnotcontroll
i
ngandnotentit
led
t
omuch
Wei ght
B)PREAMBLE: i
tisthatpartofthestat
ut efoll
owi ngthetil
eprecedingtheenacting
cl
ausewhichstatesthereasonfor,ortheobj ectofthest at
ute.
Preambl
e-thatpartofthest at
utefollowingt het i
tl
eandpr ecedingt heenacti
ng
cl
ausewhichstatethereasonorobj ecti
vesoft heenactment. I tcannotenl
arge
orconf
erpower s,
orcureinherentdefectsint hestatut
es.
-st
atest
her
easonsandobj
ect
ivesoft
heenact
ment
.
Iti
sthatpar
tofstat
uteexpl
aini
ngther easonsforit
senactmentandtheobj
ects
soughttobeaccompli
shed.Usual
l
yi tstart
swiththewor d“
whereas”
.General
l
y,
apreambleisadecl
arat
ionbythelegislat
ureofthereasonsfort
hepassageof
Pr
ofessor
,St
atut
oryConst
ruct
ion
COLLEGEOFLAW
UNIVERSI
TYOFTHECORDI LLERAS
thestat
uteandi
shelpf
uli
nt hei
nter
pret
ati
onofanyambi
gui
ti
eswi
thi
nthe
stat
utewhichi
tispr
efi
xed(Peopl
evs.Puri
sima,
86SCRA542)
Poi
ntst
oremember
:
(i
)Apreambl
edoesnotcr
eat
ear
ightnordoesi
tgr
antanyr
ight
.Iti
snotasour
ce
of
subst
anti
veri
ght
.
(
ii
)I tisnotasourceofgover
nmentpower.
(
ii
i)I
tisnotanessenti
alpar
tofthest
atut
e.
C)Wor ds,PhrasesandSent ences,Context-Theintenti

onoft hel egi
slat
uremust
pri
mar i
lybedet er
mi nedf r
om thelanguageoft hest atuteandsuchl anguage
consistofthewor ds,phrasesandsent encesusedt her
ein.Themeani ngoft he
l
aw shoul d,howev er,betakenfrom thegeneralconsiderat
ionoft helaw asa
whol eandnotfrom anysinglepar
t,porti
onorsectionorfrom isol
atedwor dsand
phrases,cl
auses,orsentencesused.
D)Punctuati
on–I tisanai doflowdegr eei ninterpreti
ngthelanguageofast atute
and can nev ercont r
ol agai nstt hei ntell
i
giblemeani ng ofawr i
tt
en word.
Howev er,
ifthepunct uati
onofast at
utegi vesitameani ngthati
sr easonabl
eand
i
nappar entaccor dwi t
ht hel egi
slati
v ewi ll
,itmaybeusedasanaddi ti
onal
argumentforadopt ingthelit
eralmeani ngoft hewor dthuspunctuated.
Impli
cithereist hepresumpt i
ont hatthel egislatureknowst helanguageitused,
i
tsrulesongr ammarandt hespeci fi
cf unctionofpunct uati
onmar ksthusused.
I
tmaybeusedasanadditi
onalargumentforadopt
ingtheli
ter
almeani
ngoft
hewor
ds
t
huspunct
uat
edbutcannevercontr
olagai
nstt
heint
ell
igi
blemeani
ngofawri
tt
enwor
d.
Itisanaidoflowdegr eeinint
erpr
eti
ngt helanguageofastat
uteandcannev ercont
rol
againsttheintel
l
igi
blemeani ngofawr it
tenwor d.However,i
fthepunctuati
onofa
statut
egi v
esitameani ngthati
sreasonableandi nappar
entaccor
dwi t
hthelegi
slat
ive
will
,itmaybeusedasanaddi ti
onalargumentf oradopt
ingtheli
ter
almeaningoft he
wor dsthuspunct
uated.
E) Headi
ngsandMar
ginalNot
es–I
fthemeani
ngoft
hest
atut
eiscl
earofi
sthe
t
extofthestat
uteisclear
,theywil
lprev
ailasagai
nsttheheadi
ngs,speci
all
yis
t
heheadingshavebeenpreparedbycompil
ersandnotbythel
egi
slat
ure.
I
tdet er
minesthescopeoftheprov
isi
onsandtheirr
elati
ontootherport
ionsofthe
act,however,i
fthemeaningofthestat
uteorifitstextiscl
ear,itwil
lprevai
las
againsttheheading,i
fthelat
terhasbeen prepared bycompilersand notthe
l
egislat
ure.
F)Body–Itcont
ainst
hesubj
ectmatterofthestat
ute.Thebodyoft
hestatut
e
shoul
dembraceonl
yonesubjectmatterexpr
essedintheTi
tl
easrequi
redbyt
he
Const
it
uti
on.
I
tisthemai noperati
vepartofthest
atut
econtai
ningi
tssubst
anti
veandev
en
proceduralprovi
sions.Pr
ov i
sosandexcept
ionsmayalsobefoundint
hebodyof
thestatute.(Di
az,page21)
Pr
ofessor
,St
atut
oryConst
ruct
ion
COLLEGEOFLAW
UNIVERSI
TYOFTHECORDI LLERAS
I
npar
ti
cul
arst
atut
esmayhav
ethese:
G)Enact
ingcl
ause-I
tist
hatpar
toft
hest
atut
ewhi
chi
ndi
cat
etheaut
hor
it
ywhi
ch
pr
omul
gat
edt
heenact
ment
.
Theenacti
ngcl
auseisnotessenti
alt
otheval
idi
tyofthelawbutt
his
clauseclot
hesthest
atut
e wi t
hacer t
aindi
gni
tybecausethespeci
fi
cauthor
it
y
thatpromulgat
edthel
awi st
herei
nstated.
“
Beenact
ed”i
stheusual
for
mul
atost
artt
hiscl
ause.
H)Body–Itcont
ainst
hesubj
ectmatterofthestat
ute.Thebodyoft
hestatut
e
shoul
dembraceonl
yonesubjectmatterexpr
essedintheTi
tl
easrequi
redbyt
he
Const
it
uti
on.
I
tisthemai noperati
vepartofthest
atut
econtai
ningi
tssubst
anti
veandev
en
proceduralprovi
sions.Pr
ov i
sosandexcept
ionsmayalsobefoundint
hebodyof
thestatute.(Di
az,page21)
I
) Excepti
onsandPr ov
isos-I
tisacl
auseaddedtoanenact
mentforthepurposeof
acti
ngasrestr
aintuponorasquali
fi
cat
ionof,thegener
ali
tyoft
helanguageit
fol
lows.
J)I
nter
pretat
ivecl
ause–Thatpar toft
hestat
utewherethel
egi
slat
uredef
inesi
ts
ownlanguageorprescr
ibesr
ulesforit
sconst
ruct
ion.
Legi
slat
iveDefi
nit
ionandI nt
erpr
etat
ion– I fthel
egisl
atur
ehavedefi
nedt he
word/susedinastatut
eandhasdeclaredtheconst
ructi
ontobepl
acesther
eon,
suchdefi
nit
ionorconst
ruct
ionshoul
dbef ol
lowedbythecourt
s.
Ther
ulesar
easf
oll
ows:
i
)I
fal awpr ovi
dest hatincaseofdoubti tshouldbeconstruedandi nt
erpreted
i
nacer t
ainmanner ,thecourtshouldfollowsuchani nstr
uction.Thi
sispar tof
t
hel awmaki ngpoweroft helegisl
atureandshoul dnotber egardedaspar tof
t
hepowerofot herdepartmentt ointerpret(Judi
ciar
y).Thismaybef oundi n
t
hei nter
pretat
iveclauseofthel aw. Exampl eofthemannerofconst ruction
-
Art.4oft heLaborCode
“
Art
.4.Const r
uctioninfavorofLabor–Al ldoubt
sin
t
he i
mplementati
on and interpret
ation of thi
s Code,i ncludi
ng it
s
i
mpl
ementi
ngrulesandregul
ations,shall
beresolv
edinfavouroflabor
.”
i
i)i
ncaseofconfl
ictbetweentheint
erpr
etat
ionclausesandt
hel egi
slat
ive
meani
ng,as r
eveal
edbythest at
utewhenconsideredinits
t
otal
it
y,t
hel
att
ershall
prevai
l.
Pr
ofessor
,St
atut
oryConst
ruct
ion
COLLEGEOFLAW
UNIVERSI
TYOFTHECORDI LLERAS
i
i
i)Atermisusedt hroughoutt
hest
atut
einthesamesensei
nwhi chitwas
f
ir
stdef
inedunlessitcanbeshownt
hatiti
sbei
ngusedi
nadiff
erentcontext
i
nthesucceedi
ngpar toft
helaw.
i
v)Legisl
ati
vedefi
nit
ionofsimil
artermsonthest at
utemayber esort
edto
exceptwhereapart
icul
arlawexpressl
ydecl
aresthatit
sdef
ini
ti
ont her
eini
s
l
imitedi
nappli
cat
iontothestat
utesinwhi
chtheyappear.
defi
nit
ionoft hel egislatur eoft hewor dsusedi nt hest atureandt he
constr
uct i
ont obepl acedt hereon.Ther ulesareasf ollows:
-Ifalawpr ovidest hati ncaseofdoubt ,itshoul dbeconst ruedand
i
nter pretedinacer t
ainmannert hatt hecour t
sshoul df ol
lowsuchi nst r
uctions.
-I
ncaseofconf l
ictbet weent hei nterpretationcl ausesand t he
l
egisl ative meani ng,asrev eal edbyt hestatutewhenconsi deredi nitstotal
ity
,
thelat tershall prevail
.
-At ermi susedt hroughoutt hest atuteint hesamesensei tisfir
st
defined.
-Legi sl
ativ
e def i
ni t
ion in similart erms on t he statute may be
resolv edto,except ,wher eapar ti
cularlawexpr esslydecl arest hatitsdef i
nit
ion
thereini s l imitedinappl icationt othest at
utesi nwhi cht heyappear .
K)Repeal
i
ngclause–Thatpartoft
hestat
utewhichannouncest
hel
egi
slat
ive
i
ntentt
oter
mi nat
eor rev
oke anotherstat
uteorst
atutes
Thatpartoft
hestat
utewhichannouncesthepr
iorst
atut
esorspeci
fi
cpr
ovisi
ons
whichhavebeenabrogat
edbyreasonoftheenactmentoft
henewlaw.(
Diaz,
page21)
L)Savi
ngcl
ause–Thi
srest
ri
ctarepeal
ingactandpreser
vesexi
sti
ngpower
s,
ri
ght
sandpendi
ngpr
oceedi
ngsfrom theef
fectoft
herepeal
.
Ar est
ri
cti
oninarepeal
ingactwhichi
sint
endedtosav
eright
s,pr
oceedi
ng,
penalt
ies,
etc.
,fr
om theanni
hil
ati
onwhichwoul
dresul
tfr
om anunrest
ri
cted
repeal
.(Di
az,page21)
M)Separabi
li
tycl
ause–Itisaclausewhichst
atesthatiff
oranyreasonanysect
ion
orprovi
sionofthest
atutei
sheldtobeunconstit
uti
onalorr
evoked,t
heother
sect
ionorprovi
sionofthel
awshallnotbeaffect
edthereby
.
Thatpar tofthest at
utewhichprovi
desorshowst hei
ntentionofthelegi
slatur
e
thatintheev entthatoneormor eprovi
sionsofthelawar enull
if
ied,decl
aredv oi
d
orunconst i
tuti
onal ,t
heremaini
ngpr ov
isionswhichcanst andbythemselv es
withoutthenul l
i
fiedpart
s,shall
sti
llbeinforce.(
Diaz,
page21)
Poi
ntst
oremember
:
(
i)Asepar abi
li
tycl ausecreat
esapresumpt i
ont hatt
helegisl
atur
eint
ended
separabil
it
yr atherthan completenull
it
yoft hestat
ute.Thi
smeanst hati
s
onepar tofthest atut
eisvoidorunconsti
tut
ional,
theotherpart
sther
eof
whichar evalidmayst il
lst
and.
(i
i
)Thisgener
alr
ule,however,
issubj
ectt
ot hel
imit
ati
onthati
fthepar
toft
he
stat
utear
esomut ual
lydependent andconnect
edtherebycr
eati
nga bel
ief
Pr
ofessor
,St
atut
oryConst
ruct
ion
COLLEGEOFLAW
UNIVERSI
TYOFTHECORDI LLERAS
thatt
helegi
slat
ureintendedthem asawhol
e,t
henul
l
ityorunconst
it
uti
onal
i
tyof
onepartmayv i
ti
atetherest.
N)Ef
fect
ivi
tycl
ause–Thatpar
tofthestat
utewhi
channouncest
het
imeordat
e
whenthelawwil
lbecomeef
fect
ive.
Not
e:Di
ff
erencebetweent
he“ef
fect
ivi
tyoft
hel
aw”(
Tanadav
s.Tuv
era)f
rom
“whenabi
llbecomesalaw”.
I
I.CONSTRUCTION-t
heactorprocessofascer
tai
ningt
hei
ntent
ionoft
heaut
hor
/sof
t
helawemployi
ngext
ri
nsi
caid.
I
tist
hedr
awingofconcl
usi
onswit
hrespectt
osubj
ectthatar
ebeyondthedi
rect
expr
essi
onofthet
extf
rom el
ement
sknownandgi v
eninthetext (
Diaz,
page2)
;
Constr
uct
ionisthedrawingofwarrant
edconclusi
onrespect
ingsubject
sthatli
e
beyondthedir
ectexpressi
onoft het
ext; conclusi
onswhichareinthespir
it
,though
notwithi
nthelet
terofthetext
.(Agpal
o,page104)
EXTRINSICAIDS–t hosef
oundoutsi
dethewri
tt
enl
anguageofthelaw. Ext
ri
nsi
cai
d
canonlyberesor
tedtoaft
eri
ntr
insi
caidhav
ebeenusedandexhausted.
-Extr
aneousfacts,cir
cumst ancesofmeansofexpl anat
ionresort
edt ofort
he
pur
poseof det er
mini
ngt helegi
slativei
ntent.
-drawi
ngconclusionsrespectingsubjectst
hatl
iebeyondthedirectexpr
essi
on
oft
hetext.
-I
tcanonlyberesortedwheni ntri
nsi
caidshavebeenusedandexhausted.
CONSTRUCTI
ON ut
il
izes ext
ri
nsi
c ai
d, whi
ch i
ncl
udes t
he
f
oll
owi
ng:
a.ContemporaneousCircumstances-condit
ionsexisti
ngattheti
met he
l
awwasenact ed;prev
iousstateoft helaw;evil
ssoughttobeprevent
ed;
customsandusagesoft hepeople.(t
hesecircumstancesconst
it
utethe
reasonwhythelawwasenact ed)
b.Poli
cy-thegeneralpolicyofthelaw orthesett
ledpoli
cyofthestat
e
whichi
nducedtheenact mentmayenl i
ghtentheint
erpr
eteroft
helawsas
tot
heintenti
onofthelegislat
ureenact
ingthesame.
c.Legi
slati
veHi stor
yoft heStatute-maybefoundinthereportsofthe
l
egisl
ative commi tteesinthet r
anscriptofst
enogr
aphicnotestakendur i
ng
heari
ngs, i nvest
igationanddebates.
ERECTORS I NC. Vs. NLRC, HON. JULI O ANDRES JR and
FLORENCI O BURGOS ( GR NO.104215,MAY 8,1996) -int
ention becauseof
amendment s.
d.Contempor
aneousandPract
icalConst
ruct
ion-t
hosewholivednearor
atthet i
mewhent helaw wasenactedwer emor eacquai
ntedoft he
condi
ti
onswhythelawwasenacted.Thei
runderst
andi
ngandapplicat
ion
Pr
ofessor
,St
atut
oryConst
ruct
ion
COLLEGEOFLAW
UNIVERSI
TYOFTHECORDI LLERAS
oft helaw,especi
all
yifthesamehasbeenconstr
uedbythejudi
cial
tr
ibunal
sandlegalpr
ofessi
on,
deser
vet
obeconsi
der
edbyt
hecour
ts.
e.Executi
v eConst ructi
on-deser v
esgr eatweightandshoul dber espect ed
i
fsai dconst r
uctionhasbeenf ormedandobser vedf oralongper iodof
ti
me.Ther ul
est orememberar easf ol
lows:
-Congr essisdeemedt ohav ebeenawar eoft hecont empor aneous
and pr acti
cal const ruction made by t he of f
icers charged wi th t he
administrat
ionofand enforcementoft hel aw.
-Thecour tshoul dr espectt hatcont empor aneousconst ruction
exceptifit iscl ear
lyer r
oneous.
-Execut i
veconst ructi
onhasmor ewei ghti fitisrenderedbyt he
ChiefLegalAdv iseroft hegov ernmentwhocani ssueopi ni
onstoassi stv arious
department soft hegov ernmentchar gedwi tht hedut ytoadmi nistert he
l
aw.
-Theopi nion,howev er
,byt heChi efLegalAdv iseri
ssubser v ientto
the r ul
ingoft hejudiciarywhi chisinchar geofappl y
ingandi nt er
pretingt he
l
aws.
f.Legisl
ativ
eConst ruct
ion-ent
it
ledt
oconsider
ati
onandgr
eatweightbut
cannotcont rolagai
nstthecour
t’spr
erogat
ivet
odeci
deonwhatiswr ong
andrightinterpr
etat
ion.
g.JudicialConstructi
on-i tispr esumedt hatst at ueswer eenactedi nthe
li
ghtofjudici
al constructiont hatthepri
orenact menthadr eceived.
-itispr esumedt hatt
hel egi slat
ure wasacquai nted
withandhadi nmi ndthej udi
cialconst ruct i
onoff or
merst at
uteont hesubject.
 wi threspecttoast atuteadopt edfr
om anot herstate,i
tispresumed
thatitwasadopt edwi t
htheconst ructionpl aceduponi tbyt hecourtofthatstate
butthisconstructi
onshoul donl ybef ollowedi fi
tisr easonabl e,inharmonywi th
j
usticeandpubl icpoli
cyandconsi stentwi t
ht hel
ocal laws.
h.Constructi
onbyt heBarandLegalComment ators-iti
spresumedt hat
the meaning publ
icly gi
ven a statute by the member s ofthe legal
prof
essionisat r
ueoneandr egardedasonet hatshouldnotbel i
ghtly
changed.The opi nion and comment ari
es oft extwriter
s and legal
comment ators,whet hertheyareFi l
ipinosorf orei
gners,mayalsobe
consult
ed,asi nf
actt heyareoftenti
mesci tedormadeasr efer
encesi n
courtdeci
sion.
(NOTE:Extr
insi
caidsareentit
ledtorespect,consi
der
ati
onandweightbut
thecourt
sareatl i
ber
tytodecidewhethertheyareappli
cabl
eornottothe
casebroughtbeforei
tforconsider
ati
on.
)
*
Constr
uctionandI nt
erpretati
ont husdifferfrom eachot her,t
heformeruses
i
ntri
nsicaidwhilethelatt
erempl oysextri
nsicaid.Both,howev er, hav ethesame
purpose-andthatistoascert
ainandgi veeff
ecttothelegisl
ativei
ntentsoyoucanuse
them atthesamet i
me.Ifnot -y oumustusedi nt
ri
nsicaidf i
rstbeforer
esort
ingto
extr
insi
caidbecauseoftheprinciple“speechistheindexofintenti
on.”
PURPOSEANDI
NTENTI
ONDI
STI
ONGUI
SHED:
PURPOSE–deal swit
hthereasonwhythelawwasmade,t
heremedyi
tseekst
o
achieve,themi schi
efitseekstopreventet
c. Itdeal
swi
ththeGOAL/OBJECTI
VEof
thelaw.
Pr
ofessor
,St
atut
oryConst
ruct
ion
COLLEGEOFLAW
UNIVERSI
TYOFTHECORDI LLERAS
I
NTENTION–hassomethi
ngt odowi t
hthemeaning andthewhen,howort o
whom the l
aw wi
l
lapply
.Itdeals wi
tht he mannerofAPLLI
CATION oft he l
aw.
Meani
ng oftheword,
phr
ase,
punctuat
ions etc.
Rel
ateto:
COMPLETENESSTEST
SUFFI
CENTSTANDARDTEST
Rul
e:Indetermini
ngtheint
enti
onofthel
egisl
atur
e,cour
tsshouldresor
tfi
rstt
o
i
nter
pret
ati
on(int
rinsi
caid)bef
oreresor
ti
ngtoconstr
ucti
on(ext
ri
nsicaid)
“
WHENTHEREI
SDOUBTI
NTERPRETANDWHENEXHAUSTEDCONSTRUCT”
Reason: SPEECH I
STHEI
NDEX OFI
NTENTI
ON(I
NDEXANI
MISERMOEST)
(
Bust
amant
evs.NLRC,
265SCRA 61,
(1996)
.
PRACTI
CALFORMULAI
NSTATUTORYCONSTRUCTI
ON
I
NTERPRETATI
ON
Exegesi
s
St
atut
ory I
ntr
insi
cAi
ds+LAW (
Pri
nci
ple)=Concl
usi
on I
ntenti
on of the
Const
ruct
ion CONSTRUCTI
ON Author
soft
heLaw
Exegesi
s
Ext
ri
nsi
cAi
ds+LAW (
Pri
nci
ple)=Concl
usi
on
I
NTRINSI
CGUIDES
UseofLat
inMaxi
ms:
(
See:CANONS-TEXTUAL)
LATI
NMAXI
MSONCONSTRUCTI
ON/
INTERPRETATI
ONOFWORDSANDPHRASES
A)VERBALEGI
S
VerbaLegi s(PlainLanguageRul e)
-Ifthest atuteiscl ear,plai
nandf reef rom ambi guit
y,itmustbegi venits
l
iter
almeani ngandappl i
edwi thoutattempt edinterpretati
on.
-Thel anguageoft hest atuteaffordst hebestmeansofi tsexposi tionand
l
egisl
at i
veintentmustbedet er minedpr i
mar i
lytherefrom.I tist hecour t’sdut yto
givethest at
utet hei nterpret
at i
oncal l
edf orbyi tslanguage.Thecour tmaynot
speculateast ot hepr obablei ntentoft hel egisl
at ureapar tf rom t hewor ds.
Popularclamorast otheenf orcementofal aw addsnot hingt o,anddet r
acts
nothi
ngf rom t hedut yoft hecour ttoconst ruet hel aw asi ti s.Thel aw may
somet i
mesbehar sh,buti fitissowr it
tenandi ntendedbyt hel egislature,the
court
shav enor ecoursebutt oappl yi
t.
(READ:Daoangv s.Muni cipalJudgesofSanNi colas,IlocosNor t
e,Mar ch28,
1988,159SCRA369)
Pl
ainMeani
ngRul
e
Pr
ofessor
,St
atut
oryConst
ruct
ion
COLLEGEOFLAW
UNIVERSI
TYOFTHECORDI LLERAS
Ifthestatuteisclear
,pl ainandf reef r
om ambi guity,i
tmustbegi veni t
sl it
eral
meani ngandappl i
edwi t
houti nterpretation.Thisisrul
er estsont hevali
dpresumpt i
on
thatt hewor dsempl oy
edbyt hel egislatureinast atut
ecor rectlyexpressit
sintentionor
willandpr ecludethecourtfr
om const r
uingi tdi
ffer
entl
y .Thel egi
slaturei
spresumedt o
knowt hemeaningoft hewor ds,tohav eusedwor dsadv isedly,andt ohaveexpr essed
i
tsi ntentbyuseofsuchwor dsasar ef oundint hestatute.ItisalsoknownasVERBA
LEGI S.
Pl
ainMeani
ng
Whenwr it
ingstatut
es,t
hel egisl
atureintendst ouseor dinaryEnglishwords
i
nt hei
ror di
narysenses.The Uni ted St at
es Supr eme Cour tdi scussed t he PLAIN
MEANING RULEi nCami nett
iv.UnitedSt ates,242U. S.470( 1917) ,reasoning"[
i]
tis
el
ementar
yt hatthemeani ngofast atutemust ,inthef i
rstinstance,besoughti nthe
l
anguageinwhicht heactisframed,andi fthatisplain.
..thesolef unctionoft hecourt
s
i
stoenforceitaccordi
ngt oitst
erms."Andi fast atute'
slanguagei spl ainandclear,t
he
Courtf
urt
herwar nedthat"thedutyofinterpretat
iondoesnotar ise,andt heruleswhich
ar
etoaiddoubtfulmeaningsneednodi scussi on."
VERBA LEGIS( Pl
ain-meani ngRul e)
-ifast atuteisclear,pl
ainandf r
eef r
om
ambigui t
y,itmustbe gi ven itsl i
ter
almeani ng and appli
ed withoutattempted
i
nterpretati
on.Thisrulereston t hepr esumptionthatt hewor dsempl oy
ed byt he
l
egislatureinast
atutecor
rectlyexpressesitsi
ntentorwillandthus,t
husprecl
udingthe
courtfrom const
rui
ngitdi
fferentl
y.
PLAI
NMEANI
NGRULE/VERBALEGI
S
PLAI
NMEANI
NGRULE/VERBALEGI
S
The"plainmeani ngr ul
e"or v
erbalegi
s i
nstat
utoryconst
ructionisthatift
he
stat
uteisclear,plainandfreefrom ambigui
ty,i
tmustbegivenit
sliteralmeani
ngand
appli
edwithouti nter
pret
ati
on.40 Thi
srul
eder i
vedf
rom themaxim Indexanimisermo
est
(speechistheindexofi nt
enti
on)r estsont hevali
dpr esumpti
ont hatthewor ds
employedbyt helegisl
atureinast atutecorrectl
yexpressi tsint
entionorwi l
land
precl
udet hecour
tfrom constr
uingitdiffer
ent
ly.Thelegislaturei
spr esumedt oknow
themeani ngofthewor ds,tohaveusedwor dsadv i
sedl
y ,andt ohav eexpressedits
i
ntentbyuse ofsuch wor ds as aref ound int he st
atut 41Ver
e. ba legi
s non est
r
ecedendum,
orf
rom t
hewor
dsofast
atut
ether
eshoul
dbenodepar
tur
e.42
(41 Southern Cr oss Cement Cor por

ati
on v . Phi
li
ppi
ne Cement Manuf acturers
Corporat
ion,G.R.No.158540,Jul y8,2004,434SCRA 65,93;Republicv s.Courtof
Appeals,
359Phi l.530,
602
42
Enjay,Inc.v
.Nat i
onalLaborRel
ati
onsCommi ssion,
315Phil.648,
656(1995);Globe-
MackayCabl eandRadi oCorporat
ionv.Nati
onalLaborRel
ati
onsCommi ssi
on,G.R.No.
82511,Mar ch3,1992,206SCRA701, 711.
)
Thel anguageoft hestatuteaffordsthebestmeansofi t

sexposi t
ionand
l
egisl
ativ
ei ntentmustbedet er
mi nedpr i
mar i
l
yt herefrom.Itisthedutyofthecourtto
givet
hest atutetheinter
pret
ati
on i tslanguagecal l
sf or
.Thecour ti
snottospeculate
astothepr obableintentoft
hel egi
slatureapartfrom t hewords.Popularclamorasto
theenforcementofal awaddsnot hi
ngt o,anddet ractnothingfrom t
hedut yoft
hecour t
Pr
ofessor
,St
atut
oryConst
ruct
ion
COLLEGEOFLAW
UNIVERSI
TYOFTHECORDI LLERAS
toconst
ruet
hel
awasitis.Thel
awmaysomet
imesbehar
shbutifi
tissowri
tt
enand
i
ntendedbyt
hel
egi
slat
ure,t
hecour
tshav
enor
ecour
sebuttoappl
yit
.(DURALEXSED
LEX)
*
*Thus,wherewhatisnotclearl
yprovidedinthelawisreadi ntothelawby
constr
ucti
onbecauseitismor el
ogicalandwi se,i
twil
lbetoencr oachuponl egi
slat
ive
prer
ogativ
etodefinet
hewi sdom ofthelaw,whi chi
sjudici
all
egislati
on(Rizal
Commer cial
Bank Cor por
ation vs.IAC, 320SCRA279, (
1999).
Whetherastatut
eiswi seorexpedientisnotforthecourt
stodetermine.Court
mustadmini
sterthel
aw, notast heyt
hinkitoughttobebutast heyf
inditandwi t
hout
r
egardtoconsequences.(Di
rectorofLandsv s.Abaya,63Phil
.559,(
1936).
1.Nat
ional
Feder
ati
onofLaborv
s.NLRC,
327SCRA158(
2000)
*Theapparentpresumptionher
eisthatthelegi
slat
ureispresumedt oknowt he
meaningofthewor d,t
ohav euseditadvi
sedly,
andt ohaveexpresseditsi
ntent
bytheuseofsuchwor dsasarefoundinthestatut
e.(Apar
rivs.CA,G.R.No.
30057,January31,1984)
RELATEDLATI
NMAXI
MS:
*VERBALEGI
SNONESTRECEDENDUM-f
rom t
hewor
dsoft
hest
atut
ether
e
shoul
dbenodepar
tur
e.
Ver
baLegi
sNonEstRecedendum
-Fr
om t
hewor
dsofastatut
ether
eshoul
dbenodepar
tur
e.
*OPTIMASTATULII
NTERPRETATIXESTI
PSUM STATUTUM-t
hebesti
nter
pret
er
ofthest
atut
eist
hestat
utei
tsel
f.
*
ABSOLUTASENTENTI
A NONI
NDI
GET-Whent
hel
anguageoft
hel
awi
scl
ear
,
no
expl
anat
ionofi
tisr
equi
red.
Absolut
eSentenciaExposi
toreNonIndi
get
-Whenthelanguageofthelawisclear
,noexpl
anat
ionofi
tisr
equi
red.
*
DURALEXSEDLEX–t
hel
awmaybehar
shbutt
hati
sthel
aw.
DuraLexSedLex( Thelawmaybehar shbutitisthel

aw.)
-Thereasonforther ul
eisthatt
helegi
slat
uremustbepresumedtoknow
themeani ng oft he words,to haveused t
hewor dsadv i
sedl
yand to hav
e
expressedit
sintentbytheuseofsuchwor dsasarefoundint
hestat
ute.
HOCQUI DEM PERQUAM DURUM EST,SEDITALEXSCRI

PTAEST-iti
s
exceedi
nglyhardbutsot
hel
awiswrit
t t
en.(hel
awmaybeexceedi
nglyhar
shbut
i
tissowr i
tten)
*AEQUI
TASNUNQUAM CONTRAVENITLEGIS–Equit
ynev
eract
sin
cont
rav
ent
ionoft
hel
aw.(Agui
l
avs.CFIofBat
angas,
160SCRA352(1988)
.
Pr
ofessor
,St
atut
oryConst
ruct
ion
COLLEGEOFLAW
UNIVERSI
TYOFTHECORDI LLERAS
*MALEDICTAESTEXPOSI
TIOQUAE CORRUMPI TTEXTUM-iti
sdanger
ous
constr
uct
ionwhi
chi
sagai
nstt
hetext(
Vict
ori
avs.COMELEC,
229SCRA269
(1994)
.
OPPOSITE MAXI MS:Li

ter
ali
mpor
tormeani
ng musty
iel
dtoi
tsappar
ent
i
ntent
,pur
poseorspi
ri
t.
“Consci enceandequi tyshoul dal waysbeconsi deredi ntheconst ruct i

onofa
statute.Thecour tsarenott obehedgedi nbyt hel i
teral meaningoft he
l
anguageoft hest atute;thespiritandi ntendmentt hereofmustpr evailoverit
s
l
etter.Thisrul eofconst ruct i
onisspeci ally appl i
cablewher eadher encet o
theletterwoul dr esulttoabsur dityandi njusti
ce( Caselav s.CA, GRNo.26754,
Oct.16, 1970, 35SCRA279; Cov s.Elector alTribunal ofHouseof
Repr esentat
iv e, 199SCRA692( 1991) ,woul dleadt omi schievousr esultsor
contravenet hecl earpur poseoft helegislature,itwoul dbeconst rued
accor di
ngt oit sspi ri
tandr eason, di
sregar di
ngasf arasnecessar ythel et
ter
ofthel aw.Ast at utemayt hereforebeext endedt ocasesnotwi thint helit
eral
meani ngofi tst er ms, solongast heycomewi t
hint hespi ri
torintent.(Rufino
Lopez&Sons, Inc.v s.Cour toftaxAppeal ,100Phi l
.850( 1957).
*
RATI
O LEGI
S-i
nter
pret
ati
onaccor
dingt
othespi
ri
torr
easonoft
hel
aw.
*VERBAINTENTIONI
,NONECONTRA, DEBITINSERVI RE-wor
dsoughtt obe
moresubser
vient t
otheint
entandnottotheintentoftheword(i
ntentoft
he
wordshoul
dnotbecontr
arytothei
ntent
ion)-EXTENSI ON=THEINTENTOF
THESTATUTE I STHELAW=CONSTRUCTI ONTOACCOMPLI SHPURPOSE.
B)DOCTRI
NEOFLASTANTECEDENTS
DoctrineofLastAnt ecedentsr ulesreferst otheappli

cationofaqual ifi
cati
onto
theimmedi atelyprecedingr efer
enceswhenmor et hanonereferencesarecont ai
nedin
thesent encesorpr ovision,unlessot herwiseitwascl earl
yev identthati
tr efer
st oa
diff
erentreferencecont ainedt herein.Ex.-Apr ovisionst
ipul
ates“ t
eachers,parent
swi t
h
ment al
lyretar dedkidsmustat t
endt he. ..
..
..
.”Her e,t
hequali
ficati
on“ment al
lyretar
ded
kids”referst othepar entsasperl astant ecedentr ul
e.Eventhought heteachercomes
l
ast ,
sinceki dsr ef
erstopar ents,itappl i
estopar entsinthi
scase.
Rel
ati
veandquali
fyi
ngwor
ds,phr
asesandcl
ausesar
et obeappl
i
edt
othewor
d
orphr
aseimmediat
elypr
ecedi
ngandnottoot
her
smoreremote.
Republ
icv
s.Lacap,
GRNo.158253,
Mar
ch2,
2007
S(
C)GENERI Oft
hesameki
nds,
class,
ornat
ure)
Ejusdem generi
s(eh-youse-
dem gener ous)adj.Latinfor"ofthesameki nd,
"used
toi
nterpreEJUSDEM tl ooselywr i
ttenstatut
es.Wher eal aw li
stsspeci f
icclassesof
per
sonsort hi
ngsandt henreferstot hem i
ngener al
,thegener alstatement sonlyappl y
tothesameki ndofper sonsort hi
ngsspeci f
ical
lylisted.Exampl e:ifal aw referst o
aut
omobi l
es,t
rucks,tr
actor
s, motorcyclesandothermot or
-poweredv ehicl
es,"vehicles"
wouldnotincl
udeairpl
anes,sincethel i
stwasofland-basedt ransportation.
.I
nt heconstruct
ionoflaws,wil
l
sandot
herinst
rument
s,whencer
tai
nthingsar
e
enumer ated,andthenaphr aseisusedwhi
chmightbeconst
ruedt
oincl
udeother
Pr
ofessor
,St
atut
oryConst
ruct
ion
COLLEGEOFLAW
UNIVERSI
TYOFTHECORDI LLERAS
things, i
tisgener allyconfinedtot hi
ngsej usdem gener as; as, whereanact( 9Ann.C.20)
prov i
dedt hatawr itofquowar rant omi ghtissueagai nstper sonswhoshoul dusurp" t
he
officesofmay ors, bail
if
fs,portr eeves, andot heroffi
ces, withintheciti
es,towns,
cor poratebor oughs, andpl aces, withinGreatBr i
tain,
"&c.; i
twashel dthat"otheroff
ices"
meantof ficesej usdem gener i
s; andt hatthewor d"places"si gni
fiedplacesoft hesame
kind; t
hatis, thatt heof f
icesmustbecor porateof f
ices,andt hepl acesmustbe
cor poratePl aces.5T.R.375, 379; 5B.&C.640; 8D.&Ry .393; 1B.&C.237.

3.So, intheconst r
uctionofwi ll
s, whencer tai
nar t
iclesareenumer ated,theterr
a
goodsi stober est ri
ctedtot hoseej usdem gener i
s.Bac.Ab.Legaci es,B;3Rand.191; 3
Atk.61; Abr .Eq.201; 2At k.113.
Whenal istoftwoormor especi ficdescri

ptorsisfoll
owedbymor egener al
descr i
ptors,t
heot herwi
sewidemeani ngoft hegeneraldescri
ptorsmustber est
ri
cted
tot hesamecl ass,ifany,oft
hespeci f
icwor dsthatprecedet
hem.Forexampl e,where
"cars,mot orbikes,motorpoweredv ehi
cles"arement i
oned,t
hewor d"vehi
cles"would
bei nterpr
etedinal imit
edsense(theref
orev ehi
clescannotbeinterpret
edasi ncl
uding
airplanes)
.
Wher east atutedescr i

best hingsofpar t
icularclassorki ndaccompani edby
wor dsofagener icchar acter
,thegener icwor dswi llusuall
ybel i
mi t
edt ot hingsofa
kindrednat urewi tht hosepar t
icularlyenumer ated,unlesst herebesomet hingint he
cont extoft hest atutet orepelsuchi nfl
uence.Ej usdem gener i
scoul dbeexpansi v e,
howev er,becauset hel i
stisnotexcl usiv
e;itmaybeexpandedi faur i
dicaltiecouldbe
foundwi thanot heritem.
Magt aj
asv .PrycePr operti
esCor p:Becausegambl i
ngwaswi tht hephr ase‘ andother
prohi bi
tedgamesofchance’ i
twasconst r
uedtor eferonlytoill
egal gambl i
ng.
PBAvCA:Wher egener alwor dsf oll
owanenumer at
ionofper sonsort hi
ngs,bywor ds
ofapar ti
cularandspeci ficmeani ng, suchgener alwor dsarenott obeconst ruedi nt
hei r
widestext ent,butar etobehel dasappl yi
ngonl ytoper sonsort hingsoft hesameki nd
orclassast hosespeci fi
callyment ioned.
Wher ethegener altermf oll

owst hedesignationofpar ti
cularthingsorcl assesof
per
sonsorsubj ects,t
hegener alterm wi llbeconst r
uedtoi ncludeonl yt hoset hingsor
per
sonsoft hesamecl ass, kindornat ureast hosespecifi
callyenumer ated.
*Thepur poseoft her uleist ogiveef f
ecttobot ht hepar ti
cularandt he
generalwor dsbyt reating thepar ti
cul
arwor dsindicat i
ng thecl assand t he
generalwor dsasi ncludingal lthati sembr acedint hesai dclass,al thoughnot
specifi
callynamedbyt hepar ticularwords.Thi si
sj usti
fiedont hegr oundt hatif
thelegislatureintendedt hegener alter
mst obeusedi ntheirunr estri
ctedsense,
i
twoul dnothav emadeanenumer at
ionofthepar t
icularsubjectsbutwoul dhave
alsousedonl ygener al t
er ms
* The pr inciple applies when speci fi
c wor ds pr ecedi ng the gener al
expressionar eoft hesamenat ure.
*Wher eoft heyar eofdi fferentgenra,themeani ngoft hegener alword
remainsunaf f
ectedbyi tsconnect ionwiththem.
( Mut
READ: ucv
s.COMELEC,
Nov
ember26,
1970,
36SCRA228)
D)EXRESSIO UNIUSEST EXCLUSI

O ALTERI
US (
Theexpr
essment
ionofonet
hing
excl
udesal
lot
hers)
Itemsnotont helistar
eassumednott obecov er
edbythestat
ute.However,
somet imesal istinast at
utei
si l
lust
rati
ve,notexcl
usi
onar
y.Thisisusuall
y
indicatedbyawor dsuchas"i
ncl
udes"or"suchas.
"
Pr
ofessor
,St
atut
oryConst
ruct
ion
COLLEGEOFLAW
UNIVERSI
TYOFTHECORDI LLERAS
 EXPRESSI
OUNI
USESTEXCLUSI
ONALTERI
US(
Incl
usi
oUni
usEstExcl
usi
oAl
ter
ius)
Theexpressmenti
onofoneperson,thi
ng,orconsequenceimpli
estheexcl
usi
onofall
other
s.
 -Menti
onofonethingi
mpl i
estheexclusionofanother
 Whenast at
uteenumeratesthesubjectsorthi
ngsonwhi chiti
stooperate,i
tis
t
obeconstr
uedasexcl
udingf r
om i
tseffectal
lthosenotexpr
essl
ymentioned.
Var
iati
on:Expr
essi
um f
aci
tcessar
etaci
tum.Whati
sexpr
essedput
sanendt
owhati
s
i
mplied.
Whereast at
uteisexpressl
yli
mitedt
ocert
ainmat
ter
s,i
tmaynot
,byi
nter
pret
ati
onor
const
ruct
ion,beextendedtoothermat
ter
s.
Canonofr
est
ri
cti
vei
nter
pret
ati
on.
Wher east atut e,byi tst erms,i sexpr esslylimitedt ocer t

ainmat t
ers,i tmaynot ,by
i
nterpr et
ati
on orconst r
uct i
on,beext ended t o others.Ther ul
epr oceedsf rom t he
premi sethatt hel egislaturewoul dnothav emadespeci f
iedenumer ati
onsi nast atute
hadt hei ntent i
onbeennott or estri
ctitsmeani ngandt oconf i
nei tster mst othose
expresslyment ioned.
Malinias v Comel ec:An at t
emptt o use an admi nist
rati
ve charge f ora cr iminal
compl aintagai nstpoliceof f
icersaccusedofv i
olati
ngt heelecti
oncode.Thecour truled
thatnotal lv iolati
onsoft heel ectioncodepr ovidedf orcriminalpenal t
iesandi nt his
case, theviolatedpr ov i
sionsonl ywar r
antt heimposi ti
onofadmi ni
strative,notcri
mi nal
,
penalties.
CentenovVi ll
alon-Pornil
los:Agr oupofol dmenchar gedwi thv i
olat
ingt hesol i
cit
ation
permi tlaw was acqui tted because t he t er
m r eli
gious purpose was notexpr essly
i
ncludedi nt hepr ov i
sionsoft hest atute,andwhatt helawdoesnoti nclude, i
texcludes.
Thel awr eferredonl yt ochar i
tablepur poses,whi chphr asecannotbeconst ruedsoas
toincludear eli
giouspur pose
 Themaxi misonlyauxil
iar
yr ul
eofst atut
oryconst
ructi
on.I
tisnotofuniv
ersal
appli
cati
onneitheri
si tconclusi
ve.Itshouldbeappl iedonlyasameansof
discover
ingthelegi
slat
iveintentwhichi snototherwisemanif
estandshould
neverbepermit
tedtodefeattheplai
nlyindi
cati
vepurposeofthel
egi
slat
ure.
Not
e:Themaxim doesnotappl
ywhenwor
dsar
ement
ionedbywayofexampl
e,
ort
oremovedoubts.
CASE:ESCRI
BANOV.AVI LAG.R.NO.30375,Sept
ember12,1978,85SCRA245
-SARMIENTOI I
IVS.MI SON(L-
79974,DEC.17,1987)-Sec16,Art
VIIoft
he1987Consti
tut
ion.(Appoi
ntmentbythepresi
dentwit
houttheappr
oval
ofthecommissi
ononappointment.
See:
CASUSOMI SUS
 CasusOmi sus
-Underthisrul
e,thewor dsorphrasesmaybesuppl i
edbyt hecourtsand
inserted in a stat
ute wher et hatisnecessaryt o eliminat
er epugnancyand
inconsistencyinthestatuteandt ocompletet
hesenset her
eof,andtogiveeffect
tot hei ntent
ionoft hel egi
slaturemani f
est
ed therein.Ther uleisespecial l
y
applicablewher esuchappl i
cationisnecessar
ytoprev entthelawfrom becomi ng
anul lit
y.Thisr uleisal sousedt osuppl yomissionsoccasi onedbycl er
ical
errors,byaccidentorinadv ert
ence.
Pr
ofessor
,St
atut
oryConst
ruct
ion
COLLEGEOFLAW
UNIVERSI
TYOFTHECORDI LLERAS
CASUSOMISUSPROHABENDUSEST
 CasusOmisusPr
oOmissoHebendusEst
Undert
hisr
ule,aperson,obj
ectort
hingomitt
edfrom t
heenumerat
ionmustbe
hel
dtohavebeenomi t
tedi
ntenti
onal
ly
.Themaxim canoperat
ewhentheomissi
onhad
beencl
earl
yest
abl
ished.
Thi
smaxi
misbett
erusedwheny
ouj
ust
if
ytheomi
ssi
oni
nanew l
aw as
compar
edt
oapr
iorl
aw.
Not
e:Di
ff
erent
iat
ethi
smax
imf
rom I
ncl
usi
oUni
osEst Excl
usi
o Al
ter
ius
E)I
NPARIMATERI
A(Upont
hesamemat
terorsubj
ect
)
Whenastat
utei
sambiguous,i
tsmeani
ngmaybedet
ermi
nedi
nli
ghtofot
her
st
atut
esont
hesamesubj
ectmatter
.
Allst
atut
erelat
ingtothesamesubject
,orhavi
ngthesamegener
alpurpose,
shoul
dbeconst ruedt
oget
herasiftheyconst
it
utedonel
aw.Theyshoul
dbe
const
ruedandharmoni
zedwit
htheexi
sti
nglaw.
F)NOSCI
TURASOCI
IS(
Awor
disknownbyt
hecompanyi
tkeeps)
*
Bir
dsoft
hesamef
eat
herf
lockt
oget
her
*
Whenawordisambi
guous,i
tsmeani
ngmaybedet
ermi
nedbyr
efer
encet
othe
r
estoft
hest
atut
e.
 Nosci
turaSoci
is
 Undert hi
sr ule,the meaning ofparti
cul
arter
ms i n a stat
ute may be
ascer
tai
nedbyreferencet
owor dsassoci
atedwit
horrel
atedtothem inast
atut
e.
 Wherepar t
icul
arwordorphr
asei nast
atut
eisambi
guousinitsel
f,ori
ssi
mply
suscepti
bleofv ari
ousmeanings,i
tstr
uemeaning maybemadecl earand
speci
ficbyconsideri
ngt
hecompanyofwor dsi
nwhichi
tisfoundorwhichi
tis
associ
ated.
-Wheret her
ear etwoormor ewordsofambiguousmeani
ngtoget
herinastat
ute,
theyareunder stoodtobeusedi nthei
rcognatesensetoexpressthesame
rel
ati
onsandgi vecolorandexpr
essiontoeachword.
-Whereal awdoesnotdefi
neawor dtherei
n,i
twi
ll
beconstruedashavi
ng
ameani ng-si
mi l
artothatofwor
dsassociat
edoraccompani
edbyit.
( Cal
READ: texv
s.Pal
omar
,Sept
ember29,
1966,
18SCRA247)
NOSCI
TUR ASOCI
IS
Wor dsmustbeconst ruedi nconj

uncti
onwi ththeotherwordsandphrasesused
i
nt hetext.Legisl
at i
veintentmustbeascer t
ainedf r
om aconsiderat
ionofthest
atuteas
awhol e.Thepar ticul
arwor ds,clausesandphr asesshouldnotbestudiedasdetached
andisolatedexpr essions,butthewhol eandev erypartofthestat
utemustbe
consideredi nfi
xi
ngt hemeani ngofanyofi t
spar tsandinordertoproducea
harmoni ouswhol e.Wher eapar ticul
arwordorphr aseinastatementisambiguousin
Pr
ofessor
,St
atut
oryConst
ruct
ion
COLLEGEOFLAW
UNIVERSI
TYOFTHECORDI LLERAS
i
tsel
forisequal
l
ysuscepti
bleofv
ari
ousmeani
ngs,i
tst
ruemeani
ngmaybecl earand
speci
fi
cbyconsider
ingt
hecompanyinwhi
chiti
sfoundorwi
thwhichi
tisassoci
ated.
Aispornav s.CA:wifeofinsuranceagentprosecut
edforhavingsoldaninsurance
withoutregisteri
ngasanagent .Usingt hi
sdoctri
ne,theCourtrul
edt hataninsurance
agentisonewhosel l
sinsuranceinr et
urnforcompensati
on,anditwasnotprov edthat
Aispornarecei v
edcompensat i
onf ortheinsur
anceshewasal legedtohav esold.(Her
defensewast hatasherhusband’ scl er
k,sheonlyrenewedtheinsurancebecauseher
husbandwasoutatt heti
me) .
Dai -
ChiEl ectronicsManuf actur ingCor p.v .Villar
ama:Dai -Chif il
edacompl ai
nt
againstVi ll
aramaf orv i
olat
inganagr eementt hathewoul dnotj oint hecompany ’
s
compet it
orwi thi
nt woy earsaf terl eav ingDai -Chi.Dai -Chifi
ledacompl aintagainst
Vill
aramaatt heRTC, whi chdi smi ssedi tongr oundsofl ackofj ur
isdiction,foritshould
hav ebeenf i
ledbef oreal aborar bit
er .Usi ngt hedoctrineofnosci turasoci is,t
hecour t
ruledt hatwhi l
etheLaborCodesay st hat“ al
lmoneycl aimsofwor kers”wer eundert he
j
ur i
sdict i
onoft heLaborAr biter,itdi dnotmeant oencompasst heent ir
euniv er
seof
moneycl aimst hatmi ghtbeasser t
edbywor kersagai nsttheirempl oy ers.Paragraph3
shouldnotber eadi nisolati
on,butr atheri nconj unctionwi t
hpar agr aphs1t o5,whi ch
allrefert omoneycl aimsofwor kersar isingfrom v i
olati
onsofori nconnect ionwithan
empl oy ee-empl oyerr elat
ionshi p.Dai -Chi ’scompl aintwasanchor edonav i
olati
onof
cont r
act ,sinceVi l
laramawasnol ongeranempl oyee.Thecour truledt hattheRTCwas
thepr operv enueforf il
ingoft hecase.
G)REDDENDOSI
NGULASI
NGULI
S
REDDENDOSI
NGULASI
NGULI
S
Referri
ngeacht oeach; leteachbeputi nit
spr operpl ace,thatis,thewords
shouldbet akendistr
ibuti
vely
.
Amador avCA:Teacher sshouldappl ytopupi lsandst udents;andheadsof
establi
shmentofar tsandt r
adest oappr
ent i
ces.Thet eacheri nchar gemustanswerf or
astudent’stort,
butint hi
scasenoneoft hosechar gedwer eei therthet eacheri
nchar
ge
orthedeanofboy s.
Peoplev sTamani :Promul gat
ionshoul drefert oj udgmentandnot i
ceshould
ref
ert oorder.Thecomput ationoft hefil
ingoft hepet i
tionwaswr ong.(Thiswasan
obiterbecauset hefi
lingwasl ateeit
herwayi tiscomput ed,andt hecour tdeci
dedon
thecaseany way ).
 ReddendoSi ngulaSingulis(Leteachbeputi nit

spr operplace)
-Undert hispr i
nciple,wher easent encehassev eralant ecedentsand
severalconsequent s,theyar et ober eaddistr
ibutiv
ely.Theant ecedentsshoul d
ber eferr
edt otheirappropriateconsequentsandv icev er
sa.
-Eachwor d,phraseorcl ausemustbegi venitsproperconnect ioninorder
togi veitproperforceandef f
ect,renderi
ngnoneoft hem uselessorsuper fl
uous.
At ranspositi
onofwor dsandcl ausesmayber esortedtowher et hesentenceor
clausei swithoutmeani ngasi tstands.
-Thisisalsotober eferr
edt oast hedoctri
neofcol l
ocat i
onwhi chlit
eral
ly
means, “r
eferr
ingeacht oeach. ”
Not
e:Reddendo….i
sdi
ff
erentf
rom DOCTRI
NEOFLASTANTECENDENT
Doct
ri
neofLastAntecedent-Whenali
stofwor
dshasamodifyi
ngphr
ase
attheend, t
hephraseref
ersonlytothel
ast
,e.
g.,f
ir
emen,
pol
icemen,
anddoctor
s
Pr
ofessor
,St
atut
oryConst
ruct
ion
COLLEGEOFLAW
UNIVERSI
TYOFTHECORDI LLERAS
i
nahospital
.(THEPHRASE“
inahospi
talr
efer
sonl
yto“
doct
ors)-doct
ri
neof
l
astant
ecedent
H)GENERALI
ASPECI
ALI
BUSNONDEROGANT(
Thegener
aldoesnotdet
ractf
rom t
he
speci
fi
c)
Descr i
bedi nTheVer aCr uz( 1884)10App.Cas.59as:" Now i fanythingbe
certainitist hi
s,thatwher et herear egener alwor dsinal aterActcapabl eof
reasonabl eandsensibleappl i
cationwi thoutextendingthem t
osubj ectsspecially
dealtwi th byear l
ierlegislat
ion,y ou ar e nott o holdthatear li
erlegislati
on
i
ndi r
ect l
yrepealed,alt
ered,order ogatedf rom mer el
ybyf orceofsuchgener al
wor ds,withoutanyev i
denceofapar t
icularintenti
ontodoso. "Thismeanst hatif
al aterlaw andanear l
ierlaw ar epot ential
ly-butnotnecessar i
l
y-i nconf li
ct,
cour t
swi lladoptt hereadingt hatdoesnotr esul
tinani mpl i
edr epealoft he
earli
erst atut
e.Lawmaki ngbodi esusual l
yneedt obeexpl i
citiftheyintendt o
repeal anearli
erlaw
 Gener
ali
aSpeciali
busNonDer ogant
 Agener allaw doesnotnull
if
yaspeci
fi
cl aw.Specialpr
ovisi
onspr
evai
lover
generalpr
ovi
sions.Aspeciall
awmustbeintendedtoconstit
uteanexcept
ionto
thegenerallaw int heabsenceofspeci
alcircumstancesforcingacontr
ary
concl
usion.
I
)DI
SSI
MILUM DI
SSI
MILI
SESTRATI
O
Thecourt
smaydi st
inguishwhenther
earef act
sandci
rcumst
ancesshowi
ngt
hatt
he
l
egisl
atur
eint
endedadi sti
nct
ionorqual
i
ficati
on.
Garvi
dav.Sales:Sal
essoughtt ohaveGarvi
dadisquali
fi
edfrom t heSKpost
becauseofage.Thecour trul
edt hatwhil
etheLocalGov ’
tCodepr ovidedthatSK
member sshoul
dbe21y ear
sold,i
taddedaquali
fi
cati
onthatshoul
doffi
cialsshoul
dbe
21y earsoldonthedateofelecti
on.Garvi
dawasdisquali
fi
edbecauseshewasmor e
than21y ear
sold,
alt
houghshewasl essthan22year
sold.
J)CASUSOMI SSUS
Casusomi ssuspr oomi ssohabendusest .Aperson,object,orthingomittedf r
om
anenumer ationi nast atut
emustbehel dt ohavebeenomi ttedintenti
onal l
y.
Thisneedst wol aws.I nexpressiouni us,i
t’sjusttheenumerationy ouar elooki
ngat ,not
anotherlaw.
COAoft hePr ovinceofCebuvPr ovinceofCebu:Thiscasei saboutt heeffectsof
anewl awonanol dlaw.TheSpeci alEducat i
onFund( SEF)al l
owedt heuseofpar tof
therealt
yandci garett
et axesforext ensionpr ogramsandschol arships.Whent heCebu
provi
ncialofficeusedi ttopayf orsalariesoft eachersandschol ar
s,COAsai dt hose
werenotchar geablet ot heSEFsi nceRA5447,whi chcreatedt heSEF,wasdeemed
repeal
edbyt heLocalGov tCode.Becauset hetwor et
ainedsect i
onsi nt heLGComi t
ted
thescholarshipgr ants,thecour truledthatwhatwasomi ttedmusthav ebeenomi t
ted
i
ntenti
onally,andsomaynotbei ncluded.
K)UBILEXNONDI
STI
NGUI
TNECNOSDI
STI
NGUI
REDEBEMOS
Whent helawdoesnotdi st
inguish,cour
tsshouldalsonotdi sti
nguish.Founded
onlogi
c,t
her ul
eiscor
oll
aryofthepr i
ncipl
ethatgeneralwordsandphr asesinast at
ute
shoul
dordinari
l
ybeaccordedtheirnaturalandgeneralsi
gnifi
cance.Itrequir
esthatthe
Pr
ofessor
,St
atut
oryConst
ruct
ion
COLLEGEOFLAW
UNIVERSI
TYOFTHECORDI LLERAS
generalwor ds and phr
ases shoul
d notbe r educed i
nto parts and ot
herpart
s
di
stinguishedf
rom theot
herpartsoastojusti
fyi
tsexcl
usi
onf rom t
heoperat
ionoft
he
l
aw.Ther eshouldbeno disti
ncti
onint heappli
cati
onofast atutewherenoneis
i
ndicated.
-
VASQUEZv s.HOBILLA-ALI
NIO(GRNO.118813- 14,APRI
L8,1997,
271SCRAci t
ingDel
osovs.Domingo191SCRA549( 1990)
L)MENSLEGI
SLATORES
Thecour t
sl ookintotheobjecttobeaccompl ished,theevi
lsandmi schieftobe
r
emedi ed orthe pur pose t o be observed.The cour tshould givet he statutea
r
easonableorl i
ber alconstr
uctionwhi chwillbestef f
ectitspurposeratherthanone
which wil
ldefeati teven though such const r
uct
ion isnotwi thi
nt he str
ictl i
teral
i
nterpr
etat
ionoft hestatute.
-Thecour tshouldgi vethestatutear easonableorliber
alconst r
uct i
on
whichwi l
lbestef f
ectitspurposerat
hert hanonewhi chwil
ldefeati
t.
-Statutesmustbeconst r
uedtoav oidi
njusti
ce
M)EXNECI
SSI
TATELEGI
S(Doct
ri
neofNecessar
yImpl
i
cat
ion)
Whatisi mpli
edi nthestatuteisasmuchpar tthereofast hatwhi chisexpr
essed.
Everystatuteisunder stood,byi mpli
cation,t ocontainal lsuchpr ovisionsasmaybe
necessarytoef fectuateitsobjectandpur poseort omakeef f
ect i
ver i
ght
s,powers,
pri
vi
legesorj urisdi
ctionwhi chi tgrantsi ncludingallsuchcol later
alandsubsi di
ary
consequencesasmaybef ai
rl
yandl ogicall
yinferredfrom itsterms.
-
Ev er
yst atut
orygrantofpower ,r
ightorprivil
egei sdeemedt oincl
udeall
i
ncidentalpower s,r
ight
sorpr iv
il
egest omakei teffecti
v e/
effectual.
N)Gener
ali
aVer
baSunGener
ali
terI
ntel
li
genci
a
Whati
sgener
all
yspokenshal
lbegener
all
yunder
stood.
Not
e:RelatetoWHEN THELAW DOESNOTDI
STI
NGUI
SH WESHOULD NOT
DI
STINGUISH
O) Rat
ioLegi
s(I
nter
pret
ati
onaccor
dingt
ospi
ri
t)
I
nconstrui
ngast at
ute,t hecour tsmustl ooki ntothespi ritoft hel aw orthe
reasonf orit.Thespi ritorintent i
onoft hel aw pr evailsovert hel ettert hereof.The
statutemaybeext endedt ocaseswhi char enoti ncludedwi thi
nt hel i
t eralmeani ngof
thewor ds,ifsuchcasei swithint her easonf ort hest atut
e.Andt hecaseswi thi
nthe
l
etteroft helawbutnotwi t
hinthespi r
itthereofar enotwi t
hinthest atut e. Nor eason,
howev er,maybei mput edtothel egislature,whi chi snotsuppor tedbyt hef actofthe
l
awi t
self
.Indeter
mi ni
ngt hereasonf orthel aw, recour semaybehadt ot hepr eambleor
applicablewhereadher encetot hel etterwoul dl eadt oabsur dity
,injustice, contradi
cti
on
ordef eattheplai
npur poseoft heact .Appar enti naccur aci
esandmi st
akesi nthemer e
verbiageorphraseologywi l
lbeov erlookedt ogiveef f
ectt othespiritoft hel aw.
*
Rat
ioLegi
sEstAnima
-Thereasonoft
hel
awi
sit
ssoul
.
*
CessanteRat
ione(Legis)CessatIpsaLex
-Whenthereasonforthelawceases,t
hel
awal
soceasest
oexi
st.
Pr
ofessor
,St
atut
oryConst
ruct
ion
COLLEGEOFLAW
UNIVERSI
TYOFTHECORDI LLERAS
P)Legi
sPost
eri
orsPr
ior
esCont
rar
iesAbr
ogant
I
ncaseofani rr
econcilabl
econfl
ictbet
weent wolawsofdi f
ferentvintages,t
he
l
at t
erenact
mentpr evail
s.Ther ati
onaleisthatal at
terlaw repeal
sanear l
ierone
becauseiti
st helat
erlegisl
ati
vewil
l.I
tistobepresumedt hatthelawmakerknewt he
olderl
aw andi nt
endedt ochangeit.I
nenactingtheolderlaw,thelegisl
atorscannot
haveknowntheneweroneandhencecoul dhavei
ntendedtochangewhatt heydidnot
know.UndertheCivi
lCode, l
awsarerepeal
edonlybysubsequentones.
Rel
atetoImpli
edRepealandThePr i
ncipl
eofHarmonizi
ngLawsofdi
ff
erent
v
int
agesbutdeal
i
ngwi t
hthesamesubj
ectmatter.
-
Newlawprevai
lsoverol
dlawi
fthet
wol awcanj
notbeharmoni
i
zed
Q)Opt
imaSt
atuliI
nter
pret
atixEstI
psum St
atut
um
-Thebestint
erpret
erofast
atut
eisthest
atut
eit
sel
f.
R)UtResMagi
sQuam Per
eat
Thi
smeanst hatitisnotenoughthatthestatut
eshouldbegiveneff
ectasa
whol
ebutthatef
fectshoul
dbegiventoeachoftheprovi
sionsoft
hest
atut
e.
S)LexPr
ospi
cit
,NonRespi
cit
-Thelawl
ooksforwar
dnotbackwar
ds.
*
LexDeFuturo,
JudexDePrater
it
o
-Thelawprovi
desf
orthefutur
e,t
hej
udgef
ort
hepast
.
T)I
ndexAni
miSermoEst
-Speechi
sthei
ndexofi
ntent
ion
U)Int
erpr
etat
ionTali
sI nAmbiguisSemperFri
endaEst ,UtEvi
taturI
nconveniensEt
Absur
dum
-Wheretherei
sambigui
ty,
suchint
erpr
etat
ionaswillavoi
dinconvenience
andabsur
dit
yistobeadopted.
V)I
nEoPl
usSi
t,Si
mper
inestEtMi
nus
Thegr
eat
eri
ncl
udest
hel
esser
.
OTHERLATI
NMAXI
MS
I
.ONCONSTRUCTI
ONANDI
NTERPRETATI
ON
A.POWERTOCONSTRUE
1.Legisint
erpret
ati
onlegi
svim obti
net
.
Judi
cialconstr
ucti
onandinter
pret
ati
onofast
atut
eacqui
rest
hef
orceofl
aw.
AI
DSTOCONSTRUCTI
ON
A.CONTEMPORARYCONSTRUCTI
ON
Cont
empor
aneaexposi
ti
onestopt
imaetf
ort
issi
moi
nlege.
Pr
ofessor
,St
atut
oryConst
ruct
ion
COLLEGEOFLAW
UNIVERSI
TYOFTHECORDI LLERAS
Cont
empor
aryconst
ruct
ioni
sst
rongesti
nlaw.
Opti
maestlegum i
nterpresconsuet
udo.
Cust
om i
sthebestinterpret
erofast
atut
e.
Regul
aprolege,
sidefi
citl
ex.
I
ndefaul
tofthel
aw,themaximrul
es.
Opt
imusinterpresrerum usus.
Thebesti
nterpreterofthel
awi susage.
Communi
serrorf
aci
tjus.
Commonerr
orsometi
mespassesascur
rentl
aw.
Quodabini
ti
ononvaletintr
actutempor
isnonconval
esci
t.
Thatwhi
chwasori
ginal
lyvoi
d,doesnotbyl
apseofti
mebecomev
ali
d.
Rat
ihabit
iomandat oaequi
paratur.
Legi
slat
iverat
if
icat
ionisequi
valenttoamandat
e.
St
aredeci
sisetnonquiet
amovere.
Fol
lowpastprecedent
sanddonotdi
stur
bwhathasbeenset
tl
ed.
I
nter
estrepubl
icaeutsitf
ini
sli
ti
um.
Thei
nter
estofthe st
ate
demandsthatt
her
ebeanendt
oli
ti
gat
ion.
I
I.ADHERENCETO,ORDEPARTUREFROM,
LANGUAGEOFSTATUTELI
TERAL
I
NTERPRETATION
I
ndexanimisermoest.
Speechi
stheindexofi
ntent
ion.
Ani
mushomi ni
sestanimascri
pti
.
Thei
ntent
ionofthepar
tyi
sthesoul.
Ver
balegi
snonestrecedendum.
Fr
om t
hewordsofthestatut
ether
eshoul
dbenodepar
tur
e.
Maledi
ctaetexposi
ti
onquaecorrumpi
ttext
um.
I
tisbadconstr
ucti
onwhichcor
ruptst
hetext
.
Li
tt
erascr
ipt
amanet.
Thewri
tt
enwordendur
es.
Clausul
arebussicstant
ibus.
Thingst
husstanding.
Absol
utasentent
ialexposi
tor
enonindi
gent
.
Whenthelanguageofthelawiscl
ear
,noexpl
anat
ioni
srequi
red.
Duralexsedl
ex.
Thelawmaybeharshbuti
tist
hel
aw.
Hocqui
dem per
quam dur
um est
,sedi
tal
exscr
ipt
aest
.
Pr
ofessor
,St
atut
oryConst
ruct
ion
COLLEGEOFLAW
UNIVERSI
TYOFTHECORDI LLERAS
I
tisexceedi
ngl
yhar
d,butsot
hel
awi
swr
it
ten.
I
II
.DEPARTUREFROM LI
TERALI
NTERPRETATI
ON
Aequi
tasnunquam cont
raveni
tlegi
s.
Equi
tyneveract
sincontr
aventi
onofthel
aw.
Aequum etbonum estl

exl
egume.
Whatisgoodandequalist
helawofl
aws.
Jusarsbonietaequi
.
Lawistheartofequi
ty.
Rat
iolegi
sestani
malegi
s.
Thereasonoft
helawi
sthesoul
oft
hel
aw.
Li
tt
eranecatspi
rit
usvivi
fi
cat
e.
Thelet
terki
l
lsbutthespi
ri
tgi
vesl
i
fe.
Ver
baintent
ioni
,nonecont
ra,debenti
nser
vice.
Wordsoughttobemoresubserv
ientt
othei
nt ent
,andnott
hei
ntentt
othewor
ds.
Beni
gnusl
egesi
nter
pret
andaesunt,quodvol
untaseraum conser
vet
ur.
Lawsaret
obeconst
ruedli
ber
all
y,sothatt
hei
rspir
itandreasonbepr
eserv
ed.
Quihar
eti
nli
tt
erahar
etincor
ti
ce.
Hewhoconsi
dersmerel
ythel
ett
erofani
nst
rumentgoesbut
ski
ndeep
i
ntoi
tsmeani
ng.
Quandover bast
atut
esuntspecial
i,r
ati
oautem gener
ali
a,st
atum gener
ali
terest
i
ntell
igendum.
Whent hewordsusedinastat
utearespeci
al,butt
hepurposeofthelawisgeneral
,i
t
shoul
dber eadasthegener
alexpressi
on.
Cessanterati
onil
egis,
cessatetipsalex.
Whent hereasonofthelawceases,thelawit
sel
fceases.
I
nter
pretati
otal
isi
nambigui
ssimperfi
endaestutevi
tet
urinconveni
ensetabsurdum.
Wherethereisambi
gui
ty,
thei
nter
pret
ati
onofsuchthatwi
llavoi
dinconveni
encesand
absur
dit
yistobeadopt
ed.
Legi
sconstruct
ionnonf
aci
tinj
uri
am.
Theconst
ructi
onofthel
awwill
notbesuchast
owor
k i
njur
y ori
njust
ice.
Ar
gument
um abinconveni
entplur
imum val
eti
nlege.
Anar
gumentdr
awnf r
om inconv
eniencei
s notforci
blei
nlaw.
Verbanihiloper
arimeli
usestquam absur
de.
Iti
sbetterthatwordsshoul
dhavenooperati
onatal
lthant
hatt
heyshoul
doper
ate
absurdl
y.
Lexsimperi
ntendi
tquodconveni
trat
ioni
.
Thelawalwaysint
endst
hatwhichi
sinaccor
dancewi
thr
eason.
Ubieadem r
ati
oibii
dem j
us.
Li
kereasondothmakeli
kelaw.
Pr
ofessor
,St
atut
oryConst
ruct
ion
COLLEGEOFLAW
UNIVERSI
TYOFTHECORDI LLERAS
Ar
gument
um asimi
lival
eti
nlege.
Anar
gumentdr
awnfrom asi
milarcase,
oranal
ogy
,pr
evai
l
sinl
aw.
Desimil
ibusi
dem estj
udici
um.
Concer
ningsi
mil
ars,t
hejudgmenti
sthesame.
Ubieadem estr
ati
o,i
biesteadem l
egi
sdisposi
ti
on.
Wherether
eisthesamereason,t
herei
sthesamel aw
Eaestacci
piendai
nter
pret
ati
onquaevit
iocaret
.
Thati
nter
pret
ationi
stobeadoptedwhi
chisfr
eefrom ev
ilori
njust
ice.
Lexi
njust
anonestl
ex.
Anunj
ustlawi
snotalaw.
Fi
atjust
it
ia,
ruatcoel
um .
Letr
ightbedone,t
houghtheheav
ensf
all
.
Nemoestsupr
alegi
s.
Nobodyi
sabovet
helaw.
Nul
lapot
ent
ialsupr
alegi
sessedebet
.
Nopowermustbeabovethel
aw.
Juraenat uraeaequum estneminem cum al

ter
iusdetri
mentoetinj
uri
afier
i
l
ocupletiorem.
I
tiscertainlynotagreeabl
etonat
uralj
usti
cethatastrangershoul
dreapthepecuni
ary
produceofanot herman’swork.
Surpl
usagi
um nonnocet.
Surpl
usagedoesnotvi
ti
ateast
atut
e.
Uti
leperinuti
lenonvit
iat
ur.
Theusefulisnotvi
ti
atedbythenon-
usef
ul.
Fal
sademostrat
iononnocet,cum decor
poreconst
at.
Fal
sedescr
ipt
iondoesnotprecl
udeconstr
uct
ionnorvi
ti
atet
hemeani
ngoft
hest
atut
e.
Nilfaciter
rornomi ni
scum decorporavelper
sonaconst
at.
Errorin
name doesnotmakeaninstr
umentinoper
ati
vewhenthedescr
ipt
ioni
s
suffi
cientl
yclear.
Cert
um estquodcer t
um reddipot
est
.
Thati
ssuffi
cient
lycert
ainwhichcanbemadecer
tai
n.
Ibiqui
dgeneral
it
erconcedi
tur,
inesthaecexcepti
on,sinonal
iqui
dsitcont
rasj
us
basque.
Wher eanyt
hingi
sgrant
edgenerall
y,
exempti
on f
rom r
igi
dappli
cati
onoflawisi
mpli
ed;
thatnothi
ngshal
lbecontr
arytolawandr i
ght
.
Summum jus,summainj
uri
a.
Theri
gorofthelawwoul
dbethehi
ghesti
njust
ice.
Jussummum saepe,
summaestmi
li
ti
a.
Pr
ofessor
,St
atut
oryConst
ruct
ion
COLLEGEOFLAW
UNIVERSI
TYOFTHECORDI LLERAS
Ext
remel
awi
sof
tenext
remewr
ong.
Nemot
eneturadi
mpossi
bil
ia.
Thel
awobl
igesnoonet
operfor
m ani
mpossi
bil
i
ty.
I
mpossibi
lum null
aobi
gat
ioest
.
Ther
eisnoobligat
iont
odoanimpossi
blet
hing.
Lexnoncogi
tadimpossi
bil
ia.
Thelawdoesnotr
equi
reanimpossi
bil
i
ty.
Lexnonint
endi
tal
iquidi
mpossi
ble.
Thelawdoesnoti
ntendt
heimpossi
ble.
I
V. I
MPLI
CATI
ONS
Exnecessi
tatelegi
s.
Bythenecessaryimpl
icat
ionofl
aw.
I
neoquodpl
ussit,
simperi
nestetmi
nus.
Thegr
eat
eri
ncl
udesthel
esser
.
Cuij
urisdict
iondat
aest
,eaquoqueconcessaessevi
dent
ursi
nequi
busj
uri
sdi
cti
on
expl
icarinonpotui
t.
Whenj
uri
sdi
cti
oni
sgi
ven,
all
power
sandmeansessent
ial
toi
tsexer
cisear
eal
sogi
ven.
Ubij
us,ibir
emedium.
Wherethereisar
ight
,ther
eisar
emedyf
orv
iol
ati
ont
her
eof
.
Ubij
usi
ncert
um,ibij
usnull
um.
Wheret
helawisuncer
tai
n,t
her
eisnor
ight
.
Exdol
omalononorituract
ion.
Anacti
ondoesnotar
isefrom f
raud.
Nul
li
uscommodum caper
epotestdeinj
uri
asuapropri
a.
Noonemayder
iveadvant
agef
rom hisownunlawf
ulact.
I
nparideli
ctopoti
orestcondit
iondefendent
is.
Wherethepart
iesareequal
lyatfaul
t,t
hepositi
onoft
hedef
endi
ngpar
tyi
sthebet
ter
one.
Quandoali
quidprohibet
urexdir
ecto,
prohibet
uretperobli
quum.
Whatcannot,byl
aw, bedonedi
rectl
ycannotbedoneindi
rectl
y.
V.I
NTERPRETATI
ONOFWORDSANDPHRASES
A.I
NGENERAL
General
iaver
basuntgener
ali
teri
ntel
li
genda.
Generalwor
dsshoul
dbeunderstoodinthei
rgener
alsense.
Pr
ofessor
,St
atut
oryConst
ruct
ion
COLLEGEOFLAW
UNIVERSI
TYOFTHECORDI LLERAS
Gener
isdict
um gener
ali
terestint
erpr
etandum.
Ageneral
statementi
sunderstoodini
tsgeneral
sense.
Ver
baacci
piendasuntsecundum subject
am materi
am.
Awordi
stobeunderstoodinthecontexti
nwhichiti
sused.
Verbamereaequi
v oca,
sipercommunem usum l
oquendii
nint
ell
ect
ucer
to
sumuntur
,tal
isi
ntell
ect
usprefer
endusest
.
Equiv
ocalwor
dsorthosewi
thdoubl
emeaningaret
obeunder
stood
accordi
ngtot
hei
rcommonandor di
nar
ysense.
Ver
baarti
sexar te.
Wordsofartshouldbeexpl
ainedf
rom t
hei
rusagei
nthear
ttowhi
cht
heybel
ong.
Verbagenerali
arest
ri
ngunt
uradhabil
it
atem r
eivelper
sonam.
Generalwordsshoul
dbeconfi
nedaccordi
ngtothesubject
-mat
terorper
sonst
owhi
ch
theyr
elate.
Ubil
exnondi
sti
ngui
tnecnondi
sti
nguer
edebemus.
Wherethel
awdoesnotdi
sti
ngui
sh,t
hecour
tsshoul
dnotdi
sti
ngui
sh.
Di
ssimi
lum di
ssi
mili
sestrati
o.
Oft
hingsdi
ssimil
ar,
ther
uleisdissi
mil
ar.
B.ASSOCI
ATEDWORDS
Nosci
turasoci
is.
Athi
ngisknownbyi t
sassoci
ates.
Ej
esdem gener
is.
Ofthesamekindorspeci
es.
Expressiouni
usestexcl
usi
onalter
ius.
Theexpr essment
ionofoneper
son,thi
ngorconsequencei
mpl
i
est
heexcl
usi
onofal
l
others.
Expr
essum faci
tcessar
etaci
tum.
Whatisexpr
essedputsanendtot
hatwhi
chi
simpl
i
ed.
Ar
gument um acontr
ari
o.
Negat
ive-
Opposit
e Doctr
ine:
whati
sexpr
essedput
sanendt
othatwhi
chi
simpl
i
ed.
Cassusomi ssusproomissohabendusest
.
Aperson,objectorthi
ngomit
tedfr
om anenumer
ati
onmustbehel
dtohav
ebeen
omitt
edintenti
onall
y.
Adproxi
mum antecedensfi
atrel
ati
oni
sii
mpediat
ursententi
al.
Aquali
fyi
ngwor
dorphr aseshoul
dbeunder
stoodasref
erri
ngtothenear
estant
ecedent
.
Reddendosingul
arsingul
is.
Referr
ingeachtoeach,orr
eferr
ingeachphr
aseorexpr
essi
ont
oit
sappr
opr
iat
eobj
ect
,
orleteachbeputinit
sproperplace.
Pr
ofessor
,St
atut
oryConst
ruct
ion
COLLEGEOFLAW
UNIVERSI
TYOFTHECORDI LLERAS
C.PROVI
SOS,
EXCEPTI
ONSANDSAVI
NGCLAUSES
Excepti
of i
rmatr
egulam i
ncasi
busnonexcept
is.
Athingnotbeingexpect
edmustberegar
dedascomingwi
thi
nthepur
viewoft
he
general
rule.
STATUTECONSI
DEREDASAWHOLEI
NRELATI
ONTOOTHERSTATUTES
A.STATUTECONSTRUEDASAWHOLE
Opti
mastatut
einter
pretat
ri
xestipsum st
atut
um.
Thebesti
nter
pret
erofthestat
uteisthest
atut
eit
sel
f.
Extot
amat er
iaemergatr
esol
uti
on.
The
exposi
ti
on ofast
atut
eshoul
dbemadef
rom al
li
tspar
tsputt
oget
her
.
I
njust
um est ,
nisitot
alegeinspect
a,deunaali
quaejuspart
icul
apr
oposi
taindi
carevel
r
esponder e.
I
tisunjusttodecideortorespondastoanypart
icul
arpar
tofalawwit
houtexamini
ng
t
hewhol eofthelaw.
Nemoeni m al
iquam par
tem r
ectei
ntell
iger
epossi
tantequam t
otum i
nterum atque
i
nter
im perl
egi
t .
Thesenseandmeani ngofthelawiscol
lect
edbyvi
ewingallt
hepartstogetherasone
whol
eandnotofonepar tonl
ybyit
self
.
Exantecendenti
busetconsequenti
busfi
toptimai
nter
pretat
ion.
Apassagewi l
lbebesti
nter
preted
byref
erence
tot
hatwhichprecedesandf
oll
owsi
t.
Verbaposter
imapr
opt
ercer
ti
tudinem addi
taadpri
oraquaecer
tit
udinei
ndi
gentsunt
ref
erenda.
Refer
enceshoul
dbemadetoasubsequentsecti
oninordert
oexpl
ainaprev
iouscl
ause
ofwhichthemeani
ngi
sdoubt
ful.
I
nter
pret
ati
ofiendaestutr
esmagi
sval
eatquam pereat.
Alawshouldbeinter
pret
edwit
havi
ewofuphol
dingrathert
handest
roy
ingi
t.
VI
.STATUTECONSTRUEDI
NRELATI
ONTOCONSTI
TUTI
ONANDOTHERSTATUTES
Parimat
eri
a.
Ofthesamematt
er.
Int
erpretareetconcordar
elegeslegi
busestopt
imusi
nter
pret
andimodus.
Everystatutemustbesoconst r
uedandharmoni
zedwi
thotherst
atut
esastof
orma
unif
orm sy st
em oflaw.
Dist
inguetemporaetconcor
dabi
sjura.
Dist
ingui
shti
mesandy ouwil
lhar
moni zel
aw.
-
Tempora mutant
uretl
egesmutant
uri ni
l
li
s.
-Timeshavechangedandlawshavechangedwi
tht
hem.
Mut
atismutandis.
Wi
ththenecessarychanges.
VI
I.STRI
CTORLI
BERALCONSTRUCTI
ON
Pr
ofessor
,St
atut
oryConst
ruct
ion
COLLEGEOFLAW
UNIVERSI
TYOFTHECORDI LLERAS
A.I
NGENERAL
Sal
uspopul
iestsupr
emalex.
Thevoi
ceofthepeopl
eist
hesupr
emel
aw.
St
atut
apropubli
cocommodolat
eint
erpr
etant
ur.
St
atut
esenact
edfort
hepubl
i
cgoodaretobeconstr
uedl
i
ber
all
y.
Pri
vatum i
ncommodum publi
cobonopensat
ur.
Thepriv
ateint
erest
soft
heindi
vi
dualmustgi
vewayt
othe
accommodat
ion
oft
he
publ
ic.
B.STATUTESSTRI
CTLYCONSTRUED
Act
usnonf aci
treum ni
simenssitr
ea.
Theactdoesnotmakeaper songui
lt
yunl
esst
hemi
ndi
sal
sogui
l
ty.
Act
usmei nvi
tof
act
ursnonestmeusactus.
Anactdonebymeagainstmywi
ll
isnotmyact.
Pri
vil
egiareci
piuntlargam int
erpr
etat
ionem v
oluntat
econsonem concedent
is.
Pri
vi
leges ar
etobei nterpr
etedinaccor
dancewiththewil
lofhi
m whogr ant
sthem.
Renunci
ati
ononpraesumit
ur.
Renunci
ati
oncannotbepr
esumed.
Str
ict
issimij
uri
s.
Fol
lowt hel
awstri
ctl
y.
Null
um tempusoccur
itregi
.
Therecanbenolegalr
ightasagai
nstt
heaut
hor
it
ythatmakest
hel
awonwhi
cht
he
ri
ghtdepends.
VI
II
.MANDATORYANDDI
RECTI
ONALSTATUTES
A.MANDATORYSTATUTES
Vi
gilant
ibusetnondor
mient
ibusj
urasubveni
unt
.
Thelawai dst
hevigi
l
ant
,nott
hosewhoslumberonthei
rri
ght
s.
Pot
ioresti
ntempor
e,pot
ioresti
njur
e.
Hewhoi sf
ir
sti
nti
meisprefer
redi
nri
ght.
I
X.PROSPECTI
VEANDRETROACTI
VESTATUTES
A.I
NGENERAL
Lexprospi
cit
,nonr
espici
t.
Thelawlooksfor
ward,
notbackwar
d.
Pr
ofessor
,St
atut
oryConst
ruct
ion
COLLEGEOFLAW
UNIVERSI
TYOFTHECORDI LLERAS
Lexdefutur
o, j
udexdepr aeter i
to.
Thelawprovi
desf orthefuture,thejudgeforthepast
.
-Novaconsti
tuti
of ut
uri
sf ormam imponer edebetnonpr
aet
eri
ti
s.
-Anewstatuteshouldaffectt hefuture,
notthepast.
Legesquaeretrospciunt
,etmagnacum caut
ionesuntadhi
bendaenequeenimjanus
l
ocaturi
nlegibus.
Lawswhicharer et
rospecti
vear
erar
elyandcauti
ousl
yrecei
ved,
for
Janus
hasreal
l
yno
pl
aceinthelaws.
Legesetconstit
utionesfuturi
scertum estdarefor
mam negot i
is,
nonadf act
a
praet
erit
arevocari
, ni
sinominatim etdepraet
eri
totempor eetadhucpendenti
bus
negoti
iscautum sit
.
Lawsshouldbeconst ruedaspr ospecti
ve,
notretr
ospect
ive,unl
esstheyar
eexpressl
y
madeappl i
cabl
et opasttransacti
onsandt osuchasarestil
lpendi
ng.
B.STATUTESGI
VENPROSPECTI
VEEFFECT
Null
um cr
imensi
nepoena,
nul
lapoenasinel
ege.
Ther
eisnocri
mewit
houtapenal
ty,
ther
eisnopenal
tywi
thoutal
aw.
Favor
abi
li
asuntampli
anda,
odiosarestr
ingenda.
Penall
awswhichar
efavor
ablet
ot heaccusedaregiv
enr
etr
oact
iveef
fect
.
X.AMENDMENT,
REVI
SION,
CODI
FICATI
ONANDREPEAL
A.REPEAL
Legesposter
ior
espriorescont
rar
iasabr
ogant.
Laterst
atut
esrepeal
prioroneswhi
charerepugnantt
her
eto.
Gener
ali
aspeci
ali
busnonderogant
.
Ageneral
lawdoesnotnul
l
ifyaspeci
fi
corspeci
all
aw.
XI
.BI
NDI
NGFORCEOFRULESOFI
NTERPRETATI
ONANDCONSTRUCTI
ON
I
gnor
anti
alegi
snemi
nem excusat
.
I
gnor
anceofthel
awexcusesnoone.
XI
I.LANGUAGEOFSTATUTEWHENAMBI
GUOUS
I
nobscuri
sinspicisol
erequodver
simi
li
usest,autquodpl
erumquef
ier
isol
et.
Whenmat t
ersareobscure,
iti
scust
omarytotakewhatappearst
obemoreli
kel
yor
whatusual
lyof
tenhappens.
Ambi
guit
asverborum pat
ensnul
laveri
fi
cat
ioneexcludi
tur.
Apat
entambigui
tycannotbecl
earedupbyextr
insi
cev i
dence.
XI
II
.PRESUMPTI
ONAGAI
NSTI
NJUSTI
CEANDHARDSHI
P
Adeaquaef
requent
ibusacci
duntj
uraadapt
atur
.
Lawsar
eunderst
oodtobeadaptedt
othosecaseswhi
chmostf
requent
lyoccur
.
Jusconst
it
uiopor
teti
nhi
squaeutpl
uri
mum acci
duntnonquaeexi
nor
dinat
o.
Pr
ofessor
,St
atut
oryConst
ruct
ion
COLLEGEOFLAW
UNIVERSI
TYOFTHECORDI LLERAS
Lawsoughtt
obemadewi
thaviewtothosecaseswhichhappenmostf
requent
ly,
and
nott
othosewhi
char
eofr
areoracci
dental
occurr
ence.
Quodsemelautbisexist
itpr
aetereuntl
egi
slat
ores.
Legi
slat
orspassoverwhathappensonlyonceortwi
ce.
Demini
misnoncuratl
ex.
Thel
awdoesnotconcerni
tsel
fwi
tht
ri
fl
ingmat
ter
s.
XI
II
.TI
TLEOFTHEACT(
INTRI
NSI
CAI
D)
Nigr
um Nunquam ExcedereDebetRubr
um.
Theblack(bodyoftheactpr
int
edinbl
ack)shoul
dnev
ergobey
ondt
her
ed(
ti
tl
eor
rubr
icofthestat
utepri
ntedi
nred)
TEXTUALMAXI
MS
 ExpressioUniusEstExcl usioAlterius(Inclusi
oUniusEstExclusioAl
ter
ius)
 CasusOmi susPr oOmi ssoHebendusEst
 CasusOmi sus
 ReddendoSi ngulaSi ngul
is(Leteachbeputi ni
tsproperplace)
 Generali
aVer baSunGener ali
terIntell
igencia
 GeneralDictum Gener ali
terEstInterpretandum
Agener alstatementisunder stoodinagener alsense
 UbiLexNonDi stinguitNecNosDi sti
ngui r
eDebemos
 NoscituraSoci i
s
 Doctri
neofLastAnt ecedent
NONTEXTUALMAXI
MS
 Rati
oLegis(Interpr
etat
ionaccor
dingtospir
it
)
 MensLegislatores
 CessanteRatione(Legi
s)CessatIpsaLex
 Rati
oLegisEstAni ma
 ExNecissi
tateLegis(Doctr
ineofNecessar
yImpl
i
cat
ion)

PROSPECTI
VE/
RETROACTI
VE
 LexDeFuturo,JudexDePrat
erit
o
 LexPr
ospici
t,NonRespici
t
Novaconsti
tut
ionfutur
esfor
mam imponer
edebetnopraet
eri
ti
s
Anewst atut
eshoul
daffectt
hef
utur
e,nott
hepast
GENERAL/
SPECI
AL
 Gener
ali
aSpeciali
busNonDerogant
Gener
alDict
um General
it
erEstI
nterpret
andum
Ageneralst
atementi
sunderstoodinagener
alsense
WHENCOMPARI
NGOLDLAWSANDNEW LAWS
Pr
ofessor
,St
atut
oryConst
ruct
ion
COLLEGEOFLAW
UNIVERSI
TYOFTHECORDI LLERAS
 InPariMater
iaRule
 LegesPosteri
oresPrior
esContr
ari
asAbr
ogant
 General
iaSpecial
ibusNonDerogant
-
--
--
--
--
--
--
--
--
--
--
--
--
--
--
--
--
--
--
--
--
--
--
--
--
-o-
--
--
--
--
--
--
--
--
--
--
--
--
--
--
--
--
--
--
--
--
--
--
--
--
--
--
--
--
--
Not
e:t
hef
oll
owi
ngar
eaddi
ti
onal
resear
chonSt
atut
oryConst
ruct
io
CANONS
Alsoknownascanonsofconst r
ucti
on, canonsgivecommonsensegui dancetocour t
s
i
ni nter
preti
ngt hemeani ngofstatutes.Mostcanonsemer gef r
om thecommonl aw
processthrought hechoicesofj
udges.Pr oponent
softheuseofcanonsar guethatthe
canonsconst rainjudgesandlimitt
heabi li
tyofthecourt
stolegi
slat
ef r
om thebench.
Crit
icsarguethataj udgealwayshasachoi cebetweencompeti
ngcanonst hatleadto
diff
erentresults,sojudi
cialdi
scret
ioni sonlyhiddenthr
oughtheuseofcanons,not
reduced.
Text
ual
Textualcanonsarerul
esoft
humbforunderst
andi
ngthewor
dsoft
het
ext
.Someof
thecanonsaresti
l
lknownbyt
hei
rtr
adi
ti
onalLat
innames.
Pl
ainMeani
ng
\ Whenwr i
ti
ngst atut
es,t helegislatureintendstouseor dinaryEnglishwor dsi n
thei
ror di
narysenses.TheUni tedSt atesSupr emeCour tdiscussedt hepl ainmeani ng
rul
einCami nettiv.Unit
edSt ates,242U. S.470(1917),reasoning" [i
]ti
selement arythat
themeani ngofast atutemust ,inthef i
rstinstance,besoughti nt helanguagei nwhi ch
theacti sfr
amed,andi fthatispl ai
n...thesol efuncti
onoft hecour tsist oenforceit
accordingtoit
st erms."Andi fast atute'slanguageispl ai
nandcl ear,theCourtfurther
warnedt hat"t
hedut yofi nterpret
ationdoesnotar i
se,andt her uleswhi charet oai d
doubtfulmeaningsneednodi scussion."
Ej
usdem gener
is(
Oft
hesameki
nds,
class,
ornat
ure)

Whenal istoftwoormor especi ficdescri

ptorsisfoll
owedbymor egener al
descr i
ptors,t
heot herwi
sewidemeani ngoft hegeneraldescri
ptorsmustber est
ri
cted
tot hesamecl ass,ifany,oft
hespeci f
icwor dsthatprecedet
hem.Forexampl e,where
"cars,mot orbikes,motorpoweredv ehi
cles"arement i
oned,t
hewor d"vehi
cles"would
bei nterpr
etedinal imit
edsense(theref
orev ehi
clescannotbeinterpret
edasi ncl
uding
airplanes)
.
Expressiouni
usestexcl
usi
oal
ter
ius(
Theexpr
essment
ionofonet
hingexcl
udesal
l
others)

I
temsnotont helistareassumednottobecov er
edbythestat
ute.However
,
somet
imesalistinastatuteisil
l
ustr
ati
ve,
notexcl
usi
onary
.Thi
sisusual
l
yindi
catedby
awordsuchas"incl
udes"or"suchas."
Excl
usi
onar
yrul
e/maxi
m
I
npar
imat
eri
a(Upont
hesamemat
terorsubj
ect
)
Pr
ofessor
,St
atut
oryConst
ruct
ion
COLLEGEOFLAW
UNIVERSI
TYOFTHECORDI LLERAS
Whenastat
utei
sambiguous,i
tsmeani
ngmaybedet
ermi
nedi
nli
ghtofot
her
st
atut
esont
hesamesubj
ectmatter
.
Nosci
turasoci
is(
Awor
disknownbyt
hecompanyi
tkeeps)

Whenawordisambi
guous,i
tsmeani
ngmaybedet
ermi
nedbyr
efer
encet
othe
r
estoft
hest
atut
e.
Reddendosi
ngul
asi
ngul
is(
Ref
ersonl
ytot
hel
ast
)
Al
soknownasDoct
ri
neofCol
l
ocat
ion
Leteachbeputini
tspr
operpl
ace-atr
ansposi
ti
onofwor
dsandclausemaybe
r
esor
tedtowherethesent
ence orcl
ausei
swit
houtmeani
ngasitst
ands.
Also distr
ibut
ive – Under t hi
s pri
nci
ple,wher
e a sent ence has sever
al
antecedentsansev er
alconsequents,theyar
etobereaddistr
ibut
ivel
y.Theant
ecedent
shouldber ef
erredtotheappropr
iat
econsequentsandvi
cev er
sa.
Eachwor dorphrasemustbegi veni

tspr operconnect
ioninordert
ogi
vei
t
pr
operforceandef
fect
,render
ingnoneoft
hem usel
essorsuperf
luous.
Whenalistofwor
dshasamodifyi
ngphr
aseatt
heend,
thephr
aser
efer
sonl
yto
t
hel
ast
,e.
g.,
fir
emen,pol
icemen,
anddoct
orsi
nahospi
tal
.
Gener
ali
aspeci
ali
busnonder
ogant(
Thegener
aldoesnotdet
ractf
rom t
hespeci
fi
c)
Descr ibedi nTheVer aCruz( 1884)10App.Cas.59as:" Now ifany thingbe

certainitist his, t
hatwher etherearegeneralwor dsinal aterActcapabl eofr easonable
andsensi bl eappl icati
onwi thoutextendi
ngt hem tosubj ectsspeci al
lydeal twi t
hby
earl
ierl egislati
on,y ouar enott oholdthatearlierl
egisl
ationi ndi
rectlyrepealed,altered,
order ogat edf r om mer elybyf or
ceofsuchgener alwords,wi t
houtanyev i
denceofa
particulari ntent i
ont odoso. "Thismeanst hatifal at
erl aw andanear l
ierl aw are
potent i
ally-butnotnecessar il
y-inconfli
ct,courtswilladoptt her eadingthatdoesnot
resultinani mpl i
edr epealoftheearli
erstatute.Lawmaki ngbodi esusual l
yneedt obe
explicitiftheyi ntendt orepealanearl
ierl
aw.
Subst
ant
ive
Subst
anti
vecanonsinst
ructt
hecour
ttof
avori
nter
pret
ati
onst
hatpr
omot
ecer
tai
n
val
uesorpol
icyresul
ts.
 "
Char
mingBet
sy"Canon
Nati
onalstatutemustbeconstruedsoasnott oconf l
ictwithinter
nati
onall
aw.
SeeMur r
ayv .TheChar
mingBet sy,
6U.S.(2Cranch)64( 1804):"
Ithasalsobeen
obser
vedt hatanactofCongressoughtnevertobeconst ruedtov i
olat
ethelaw
ofnati
onsi fanyot
herpossi
bleconstr
ucti
onremai ns.
..
"
 I
nter
pret
ati
oni
nLi
ghtofFundament
alVal
ues
St
atutedoesnotvi
olat
efundamental
societalv
alues.See,
forexampl
e,Hol
y
Tr
ini
tyChurchv.Uni
tedStat
es,143U.S.457(1892).
Pr
ofessor
,St
atut
oryConst
ruct
ion
COLLEGEOFLAW
UNIVERSI
TYOFTHECORDI LLERAS
 Rul
eofLeni
ty
Inconstrui
nganambi guouscr i
minal st
atute,t
hecour tshoul
dr esolvethe
ambi gui
tyinfavorofthedefendant .SeeMcNal lyv.UnitedStates, 483U.S.350
(1987);See,e.g.
,Muscarell
ov .U.S.
, 524U.S.125( 1998)(decliningtoapplythe
rul
eofl eni
ty);
Ev ansv.U.S.
,504U. S.255( 1992)(Thomas, J.,dissenting)
;
Scarboroughv .U.S.,
431U.S.563( 1977)( Stewart
,J.,di
ssenting) SeeUni
; ted
Statesv.Santos( 2008)
.
 Av
oidanceofabr
ogat
ionofst
atesov
erei
gnt
y
SeeGr egor
yv.Ashcr
oft,501U.
S.452(
1991);
seeal
soGonzal
esv.Oregon,
546
U.S.243(2006)
;seealsoNevadaDept
.ofHumanResour
cesv.Hi
bbs,538U.S.
721(2003)
Def
erence
Deferencecanonsi nstr
uctt
hecourttodef
ertot heint
erpr
etati
onofanot heri
nst
ituti
on,
suchasanadmi nistr
ati
veagencyorCongress.Thesecanonsr ef
lectanunderst
anding
thatthej udi
ciar
yisnott heonlybr
anchofgov ernmentent r
ustedwi t
hconstit
utional
responsibil
it
y.
 Def
erencet
oAdmi
nist
rat
iveI
nter
pret
ati USChev
ons( rondef
erence)

Ifastatut
eadmi ni
steredbyanagencyi sambi guouswit
hrespecttothespeci
fi
c
i
ssue, t
hecourtswil
l defertotheagency'
sreasonablei
nter
pretat
ionofthe
stat
ute.Thisr
uleofdef erencewasformulatedintheUSbyt heUnit
edSt at
es
SupremeCour nChev
ti r
onv .Natur
alResourcesDefenseCouncil
,467U.S.837
(1984).
A)Av
oidanceCanon(
CanonofConst
it
uti
onalAv
oidance)

Ifast at
ut eissusceptibl
et omor et hanoner easonableconst ruction,courts
shouldchooseani nter
pretat
iont hatav oidsraisi
ngconst i
tuti
onalpr oblems.I n
theUS, t
hiscanonhasgr ownst rongeri nr ecenthist
ory.Thet r
adit
ional avoidance
canonr equir
edt hecour ttochooseadi ffer
entinterpret
ati
ononl ywhenone
i
nterpret
ationwasact uall
yunconst it
ut ional.Themoder navoidancecanont ell
s
the courtt o choose a diff
erenti nter pretat
ion when anot heri nterpretat
ion
[
4][
5]
merelyraisesconstit
uti
onaldoubt s.
 Av
oidi
ngAbsur
dit
y
[6]
[7]
Thel
egi
slat
uredi
dnoti
ntendanabsur
dormani
fest
lyunj
ustr
esul
t.
B)CLEARSTATEMENTRULE
Whenast at
utemaybei nterpretedtoabr i
dgelong-
hel
dr i
ghtsofindi
vi
dual sor
stat
es,ormakeal argepol i
cychange,cour t
swi l
lnotint
erpretthestatuteto
maket hechangeunl esst helegislat
ureclear
lystat
edit.Thi
sr ul
eisbasedon
theassumpt i
onthatthel egislat
urewoul dnotmakemaj orchangesinav ague
orunclearway ,andt oensur et hatvotersareabletohol dtheappr opri
ate
l
egisl
atorsresponsi
blefort hemodi fi
cati
on.
Pr
ofessor
,St
atut
oryConst
ruct
ion
COLLEGEOFLAW
UNIVERSI
TYOFTHECORDI LLERAS
Legespost
eri
orespri
orescontr
ari
asabrogant(
Subsequentl
awsr
epeal
thosebef
ore
enact
edtothecont
rary
,aka"Lasti
nTime")
Whent
wost
atut
esconf
li
ct,
theoneenact
edl
astpr
evai
ls.
Cr
it
ici
sm
Crit
icsoft heuseofcanonsar guet hatcanonsimput esomesor tof"omni sci
ence"to
thelegi sl
ator,suggestingthatitisawar eofthecanonswhenconst r
uctingthelaws.In
addition,itisarguedt hatthecanonsgi veacredencet ojudgeswhowantt oconst r
uct
thel aw acer tai
nway ,imparting af alsesenseofj ustif
icat
ion t
ot heirotherwise
arbit
rar ypr ocess.Inacl assicar t
icle,Kar
lLlewell
y narguedt hateverycanonhada
[
8]
"count er-
canon"t hatwouldleadtotheopposi t
einterpret
ationofthestatute.
Howev er,i
tcoul dbear guedt hatthefundament alnatureofl anguagei stoblamef orthe
problem of" forev er
ycanon, acounter.
"Interpreti
ngwhet herast at
uteappl i
est oagi ven
setoff actsof tenboilsdownt oanalyzingwhet herasi nglewor dorshor tphrasecov ers
someel ementoft hefactualsituati
onbef orethej udge.Theexpansi venessofl anguage
necessar il
ymeanst hatther ewilloft
enbegood( orequal lyunconv i
ncing)ar gument s
fort wocompet i
nginterpretati
ons.Aj udgeist henf orcedt oresorttodocument ati
onof
l
egi slativeint ent,whichmayal sobeunhel pful
,andt henf i
nall
yt ohi sorherown
j
udgmentofwhatout comei sul ti
mat elyfairand l ogi calundert het otali
tyoft he
circumst ances.Canonsofst atutoryconst ructi
on gi vej udgest he abil
ityto deci de
quest ionsofst atut
oryi nterpr
etati
ont hatnecessar i
lyr elyonanel ementofj udicial
discret i
on.
-
--
--
--
--
--
--
--
--
--
--
--
--
--
--
--
--
--
--
--
--
--
--
--
--
--
--
--
--
--
0--
--
--
--
--
--
--
--
--
--
--
--
--
--
--
--
--
--
--
--
--
--
--
--
--
--
Chapt
er2
PRESUMPTI
ONS
Note: Thel egi

slatur
eispresumedtoknow t her
ulesofconst
ruct
ioninenact
inga
stat
ute.Thelegi
slat
ureenact
salawwitht
heendi nvi
ewthati
twil
l,i
ncaseofdoubt,
be
constr
uedi naccordancewithsett
ledpr
inci
plesand r ul
es est abl
ishedbylegal
hermeneuti
cs.
"
[I
]ni nterpr
eti
ngast atuteacour tshoul dalwayst urntoonecar di
nalcanon
befor
eal lothers....[
C]ourt
smustpr esumet hatal egi
slat
uresay sinastatut
ewhati t
meansandmeansi nast at
utewhati tsaysthere.
"Connect i
cutNat '
lBankv.Germain,
112S.Ct .1146,1149( 1992).Indeed,"whent hewor dsofast atuteareunambiguous,
then,
thisfir
stcanoni salsothelast:'
judi
cial
inqui
ryiscompl et
e.'
"[
1]
“
Af undament
alrul
eofstat
utoryconst
ructi
onrequi
resthateverypartofast
atut
e
bepresumedt ohavesomeef f
ect
,andnotbet reat
edasmeani ngl
essunlessabsol
utel
y
necessary
."RavenCoalCorp.v
.Absher,153Va.332,149S.E.541(1929).
"I
nassessi
ngst at
utorylanguage,unl
esswordshaveacqui
redapeculiarmeaning,
byv i
rtueofstatutor
ydef i
niti
onorj udici
alconstr
uct
ion,t
heyaret obeconst ruedin
accordancewiththei
rcommonusage. "Mull
erv.BPExplor
ati
on(Alaska)I
nc.,923P.2d
783,787-88(Al
aska1996) ;
"The pr
incipalcommand ofst atutor
yconst ruct
ion isthatthe cour tshould
determineandef fectuat
et heintentoft helegislat
ureusi ngtheplai
nl anguageoft he
statut
east heprimaryindicatoroflegi
slati
veintent."Stat
ev .Ogden,118N. M.234,242,
880P. 2d845,853( 1994)“ Thewor dsofast atute...shoul dbegi ventheirordi
nary
Pr
ofessor
,St
atut
oryConst
ruct
ion
COLLEGEOFLAW
UNIVERSI
TYOFTHECORDI LLERAS
meani ng,absentclearandexpresslegislat
iveint
entiont ot hecontrary,”aslongast he
ordinarymeani ngdoes“ notrenderthest atut
e’sappl i
cationabsur d,unr easonabl
e,or
unjust.
”St atev .Rowell
,121N. M.111,114,908P. 2d1379,1382( 1995)Whent he
meani ngofast at
uteisunclearorambi guous,wehav er ecognizedt hati ti
s“thehigh
dutyandr esponsi
bil
it
yoft hejudi
cialbranchofgov ernmentt of acil
i
tat eandpr omote
thelegisl
at ur
e’saccompli
shmentofi tspurpose.”Stateexr el
.Helmanv .Gall
egos,117
N.M.346,353,871P. 2d1352,1359( 1994).-New Mexi cov .Juan,2010- NMSC- 041,
August9, 2010
Presumpt i
onofVal idi
ty
Ev erystatut
epassedbythelegisl
aturei
spresumedtobev ali
dbecauset he
l
egislaturei ssupposedtohaveconsideredthequesti
onofi t
sv al
iditybef oreappr
ov i
ng
i
t.Thel egisl
ati
vedepartmentofthegov ernmenti
tsel
ffi
rstdetermi nest hequestionof
vali
dityofev er
ystatut
e-eventhepresidentwhenthebil
lissubmi t
t edt ohisoffi
cefor
approv al(executi
vedepart
ment). I
ncasesofdoubt,thecour tr esol
v esi
nfavorof
i
tsv al
idity.
Presumpt ionofConst i
tuti
onali
ty
Thepr esumptionisalwaysinf
avorofconstit
uti
onal
it
y.However,i
fthest
atut
eis
reall
yunconst i
tuti
onal,t
hecour
tsarenotonl yauthor
izedbutmustdeclareit
s
unconstituti
onali
ty.Thecour tmustseet oitt hattheotherdepart
ment shavenot
exceeded t hei
rconst it
uti
onalaut
hori
ty.(Essence ofSeparat
ion ofPowers and
System ofCheckandBal ance)
- ABAKADA GURO PARTY v s.HON.CESAR PURI SIMA (GR NO.166715,AUG.

14,2008)
“Alawenact edbyCongr essenjoy
sast rongpr esumptionofconsti
tutional
it
y.To
j
ust i
fyi tsnulli
fi
cation,theremustbeacl earandunequi vocalbreachoft he
Constitution,notadoubt fulandequiv
ocalone.( CENTRALBANKEMPLOYEES
ASSOCI ATIONINC.Vs.BANKOSENTRALNGPI LIPINAS,GRNO.148208, DEC.15,
2004, 446SCRA299) ”
“Toi nvali
dateRA9335basedont hepet it
ioner’sbaselesssupposi t
ionisan
aff
rontt ot hewi sdom notonl ytothelegisl
aturet hatpasseditbutal sotothe
executivewhi chappr ovedit.
”
Presumpt ionofGoodFai t
h
Itispr esumed thatt he legisl
ati
vedepartmenthad good motivesi n havi
ng
consideredandadopt edapar ti
cularlaw;thati
tactedfr
om patr
iot
icandj ustmot i
ves;
thati
tact edwi t
hadesir
et opr omot ean i
ntent
ionnottodisregar
dt heciv i
land
poli
ti
cal l
ibert
iesoft
hepeopl e.
Presumptionagai
nstInj
ust
ice
Incaseofdoubtintheint
erpr
etat
ionoflaws,itispr
esumedthatt
he
l
awmaki ng bodyi nt
endedri
ghtandj
usti
cetoprevai
l(Ar
t.10,New Ci
vi
lCodeoft
he
Phil
ippi
nes).
Presumpt i
onagai nstInconsistency/PresumptiononConsi stency
Incaseofdoubt ,suchconst ructi
onaswi llmakeal lpr
ovi
sionsoft he
statut
e consist
entwi t
honeanot herandwi t
htheentir
eactshouldbeadopted.
A wor d orphr aser epeated in a st
atue willhavethesamemeani ng
throughoutthe st
atute,unlessadi ff
erentint
enti
onappear s.
I
tispresumedthatastatut
ewillbeint
erpr
etedsoastobei nter
nall
yconsi
stent
.
Aparti
cul
arsecti
onofthest at
uteshallnotbedivor
cedfrom t
her estoftheact.The
ej
usdem generi
s(Lat
infor"ofthesameki nd")r
uleappl
i
est oresolvetheprobl
em of
Pr
ofessor
,St
atut
oryConst
ruct
ion
COLLEGEOFLAW
UNIVERSI
TYOFTHECORDI LLERAS
givi
ngmeani ngt ogr oupsofwor dswher eoneoft hewordsisambi guousori nher entl
y
unclear.Ther ul eresultst hatwher e" generalwor dsfol
l
ow enumer ationsofpar ti
cular
classesorper sonsort hings,thegener alwor dsshal
lbeconstruedasappl i
cableonl yto
personsort hingsoft hesamegener alnat ureorkindasthoseenumer ated.
"49F.Supp.
846,859.Thus,i nast atuteforbiddingt heconceal mentonone' sper sonof" pistols,
revolver
s, der
ringers,orot herdanger ousweapons, "thet
er m"dangerousweapons"may
beconst ruedt ocompr ehendonl ydanger ousweaponsoft hekindenumer ated,i .
e.,
fi
rearms, orper hapsmor enar r
owlyst i
ll,handguns.Here,thet
er m"dangerousweapons"
mustbegi venameani ngoft he"sameki nd"ast hewordofestabli
shedmeani ng.
Astatut
eshallnotbeinter
pret
edsoast obei
nconsi
stentwi
thotherst
atutes.Where
t
herei s an i
nconsi
stency,the j
udi
ciar
y wi
l
lat t
emptt o pr
ovide a harmonious
i
nter
pretat
ion.
HARMONI
ZINGSTATUTES
Theruleisthatast
atuteshoul dbesoconst ruednotonlytobeconsi st
entwithitsel
fbut
al
sot oharmonizewit
hot herlawsoft hesamesubj ect,astoform acomplete,coherent
andintel
l
igi
blesyst
em....
..everystat
utemustbesoconst r
uedandhar monizewithot her
stat
uteastof or
m auniform system ofjur
isprudence.(
Republicvs.Asunci
on,231SCRA
211)
Stat
utesinparimateri
ashouldbeconstruedtoattai
nthepur poseofanexpr ess
nati
onalpol
icy.Fortheassumptioni
sthatwhenev ert
hel egi
slati
veenactaalaw,ithas
i
nmi ndthepreviousstat
utesrel
ati
ngtothesamesubj ectmat ter,
andinthwabsenceof
anexpressrepealoramendment ,t
henewl awisdeemedenact edinaccordwiththe
l
egisl
ati
vepolicyembodiedinthesepri
orstat
utes.(Coronavs.Cour tofAppeals,
214
SCRA378( 1993)
"Provi
sionsi nanactwhi char eomi t
tedi nanotheractr elati
ngtot hesamesubj ect
mat t
erwi l
lbeappl iedinapr oceedingundert heot heractwhennoti nconsistentwi tits
purpose.Priorstatutesrelati
ngt ot hesamesubj ectmat terar etobecompar edwi tht he
new provisi
ons,andi fpossi blebyr easonableconst ructi
on,bot haretobeconst rued
thateffectisgi vent oev erypr ovisi
onofeach.St at
utesi npar imateri
a,althoughi n
apparentconf l
ict,aresof arasr easonablypossi bleconst ruedtobei nharmonywi th
eachot her.(Vda.deUr banov s.GSIA,G.R.No.137904,Oct .19,2001.Citedi nRuben
Agpalo,SyatutoryConstruct i
on, p.378,SixthEd.,
1990, publishedbyRexBookSt ore)
Presumpt
ionagainstAbsurdity
Iti
spr esumedt hatthel
egi
slat
uredoesnoti
ntendthatabsur
ditywi
llf
low
fr
om it
s enactment.Thecour tst
her
eforehav
ethedutytoint
erpr
etthelawinsuch
awayasto av oi
dabsur dresult
s.
-
ELCANOv s.HILL,
77SCRA98( 1977)
-
FUELLASv s.CADANOETAL,3SCRA361-
367
-
LIBIv
s.I
AC, 214SCRA16(1992)
Pr
esumpt ionagainstInef
fect
iveness
I
tispresumedt hatthelegisl
ativ
ebodydoesnoti ntendt
oadoptlaws,
whi
char e unnecessar yandineffect
ive.I
tispresumedt
hati
tintendst
oimpar
ttoit
s
Pr
ofessor
,St
atut
oryConst
ruct
ion
COLLEGEOFLAW
UNIVERSI
TYOFTHECORDI LLERAS
enact
mentsuch ameani ngaswi llr
enderthem oper
ati
veandef fect
ive.Ther
eare
twoimportantr
ulesi
n st
atutor
yconstr
ucti
ononthispoi
nt,t
hus:
a.
)Wher eal aw issuscepti
bleoftwoconstruct
ions,onewi llr
enderi
t
unconsti
tuti
onalandtheotheruphol
dsitsvali
dit
y ,t
helatt
ermust
beadopted.
b.
)Wheret
he language oft he law is suscept
ibl
e oftwo ormor e
construct
ion,one wi
llrendert
hest atut
ei nef
fecti
veorineff
ici
entandanother
whichwi l
ltendto
gi
veeffectt
ot heobjectforwhichthelawwasadopted,t
hen
l
attershouldprevai
l
.
Presumptionagai
nstIrr
epeal
ableLaws
I
tispresumedthatthelawmakingbodydoesnoti ntendt
hatit
slawsshall
be i rr
epeal
ablebecauseCongresscannotenacti
rrepeal
ablelawsnorli
mitit
sfutur
e
legi
slat
iveact.Theneedoftodayandt hesit
uationobtai
ningnowwi l
lnotmost
l
ikel
ybe t
hesamei ntheyearstocome.Lawsshoul dadopttochangi
ngtimes.
Pr
esumpt
ionagainstI
mpliedRepeal
Repealbyimpl i
cati
oni snotf avored.Ther
earetwor equi
rementsbef
orea
st
atut
e canbeconsider edtohav erepealedapr i
orst
atuebyimplicat
ion,
namely
:
a.)Thatt
hest atut
et ouchont hesamesubj ectmatter
;and,
b.)Thatt
helat t
erstatuteisrepugnanttotheearl
ierone
Not e:Rulestorememberont hemat tersorrepeal.

1.Lawsar erepeal
edonl ybysubsequentones,andt hei
rv iol
ationornon-
obser vanceshallnotbeex cusedbydi suse,custom orpr acti
cet ot hecontrary
(Art.7,NewCi vi
lCodeoft hePhi li
ppines).
2.Whenal awwhi chexpr esslyrepealsapr i
orone,t hef i
rstlawshallnot
be t herebyr evi
ved,unlessexpr esslysopr ovi
ded.Howev er,whenal aw repealsa
pri
orl aw, notexpr esslybutbyi mpli
cat i
ononl y,it
sr epealr evivest hepr i
orl aw,
unless, the l anguageoft herepealingstatuteprovidesotherwise.
3.A generallaw doesnotr epealspeciallaw unl essi tissoexpr essly
provided, or t heyareincompat ibl
e,inwhi chcase,t hespeci all aw prevailsovert he
gener allaw.
Presumpti
onagainstVi
olat
ionofPubl i
cPolicy
I
tispr
esumedt hatthelegi
slat
uredesi
gnedtofav
orandf osterrathert
han
to contr
avenethepubli
cpolicywhichisbaseduponthepri
nci
plesofnat uralj
ust
ice,
good morals,andt
hesettl
edwi sdom oft
hel awasappl
iedt
otheor di
naryaffair
sofli
fe.
Presumpt i
onofKnowl edgeofExi stingLaws
I
n enacti
ng al aw,t hel awmaking bodyi spresumed to havet hef ul
l
knowledgeof exist
inglawsont hesubject
.Hence,iftherearetwol awsont he
samesubj ectenact
edi n differ
entdat es,the latt
erlaw cannotbe hel dt o hav e
abrogatedtheformerlawunless r epugnancyisclear,
convi
ncingandir
reconcil
able.
Presumpt i
onofAcquiescencetoJudici
alConstruct
ion
Whent hecour thasconstruedast at
uteinapar
ticul
armannerandthe
l
awmaki ng bodymadenomov etoalt
eroramendt hesai
dst
atute,
iti
spresumedt
hat
thelegi
slat
urehasacquiescedtothati
nterpr
etat
ion.
Anotherki
nd i
s when Congr
ess uses a word orphrase which was
consi
sent
lydef
inedbytheSupr
emeCour ti
nvar
iousdecidedcase,i
tispresumedt hat
Pr
ofessor
,St
atut
oryConst
ruct
ion
COLLEGEOFLAW
UNIVERSI
TYOFTHECORDI LLERAS
Congressusedt
hatpart
icul
arwordorphrasei
nsuchmannerasconsi
stent
lydef
inedby
theSupremeCourti
ntheprevi
ouscases.
PresumptionofJur
isdi
cti
on
Astat
utewil
lnotbeconstr
uedinsuchamannerastooustorr
estr
ictt
he
j
urisdi
cti
onofthesuper
iorcour
tsortovestanewjuri
sdi
cti
oni
nthem,unl
ess,t
hereare
expresswordsoranecessaryi
mpli
cati
ontotheeff
ect.
Presumpt i
ononAct i
ngwi t
hintheScopeofAut horit
y
Iti
spresumedt hatthelegislat
ureactedwithi
nthescopeofi tsauthorit
y .I
f
a stat
uteadmitsofmor et hanonei nter
pretati
on,onet hatplacest hest atute
outsi
deoft he l
egisl
ati
vecompet enceandonet hatplacesthel egisl
ati
vewi thin
theli
mi t
soflegi
slat
ive compet ence,thecourtshouldadoptthelat
terinter
pretati
on.
Presumpt i
onagainstViol
ati
onofInt
ernati
onalLaw
I
tispresumedthatastatut
eisinconfor
mi t
ywitht
her ul
esandprinci
ples
of I nternati
onalLaws,orwi thtreat
ies dul
yentered i
nto and accept
ed byour
government . Thisi
si nli
newi t
hSection2,Arti
cleIIofthe1987Const it
uti
on,
whichprovides:
“
Sect
ion2.ThePhi li
ppi
nesr enounceswarasani nstr
umentofnati
onal
pol
i
cy, adopt
sthegeneral
lyacceptedprinci
plesofi
nter
nati
onal
lawaspart
oft
helawof t
heland,andadher estothepoli
cyofpeace,equal
i
ty,
j
usti
ce,f
reedom, cooperati
on
andamitywit
hal lnat
ions.”
 Doctr
ine ofIncorpor
ati
on-hol
dst hateveryst
atei
s,byr eason ofit
s
member shi
pi nthefamilyofnat
ions,boundbythegener
allyaccept
ed
pr
inci
plesofinter
nati
onall
aw.
 Doctr
ineofTransfor
mation-hol
dsthatani nt
ernati
onalagreementwoul
d
bebindi
ngonlyuponast ateift
hatstat
eenactsal awspecifi
cal
lymaki
ng
suchint
ernat
ional
agreementpartandparcelofthei
rlaws.
"CharmingBetsy"Canon
Nationalstat
utemustbeconst ruedsoasnott oconfli
ctwithint
ernat
ionall
aw.See
Mur r
ayv .TheCharmi ngBet
sy,6U.S.(2Cranch)64(1804):"
Ithasalsobeenobser
ved
thatanactofCongr essoughtnevertobeconstruedt
ov i
olat
ethelawofnat i
onsi
fany
otherpossibl
econstructi
onr
emains..
."
GENERALPRI
CIPLESI
NTHECONSTRUCTI
ONOFSTATUTES
1.I
nPar iMateri
aRuleWhenast atut
eisambiguous,it
smeaningmaybe
det
erminedinli
ghtofot
herst
atutesonthesamesubjectmat
ter.
2.St
atut
esmustber
eadandconst
ruedasawhol
e.
(
seeHARMONIZI
NGSTATUTE)
3.Legislati
veintentmustbeascert
ainedfrom t
hestatuteasawhol
e
(Utresmagi squam per eat
-iti
snotenought hatthestat
uteshoul
dbe
givenef fectasawhol ebutthateffectshoul
dbegi v
entoeachoft he
provisionofthest at
ute)
See;PRESUMPTI ONONEFFECTI VENESS
Pr
ofessor
,St
atut
oryConst
ruct
ion
COLLEGEOFLAW
UNIVERSI
TYOFTHECORDI LLERAS
4.Court
shavethedut
yt oreconcil
eorhar monizethediff
erentpr
ovi
sionsof
t
hest
atut
e,i
ncl
udi
ngt heconfl
ict
ingprovisi
onsther
eof.
SeePresumptionConsistency (i nt
ernalandexter
nal)and
ef
fect
iveness
5.Asar
ule,
stat
utesofl
att
erdat
espr
evai
l
.
6.Gener
ali
aspeci
ali
busnonder
ogant
7.Aspeci
all
awpr
evai
l
sov
eragener
all
aw.
CASSI
ONv
s.BANCONACI
ONALFI
LIPI
NO,
89Phi
l
.560-
561
8.I
ninter
pret
ingre-
enact
edstatut
es,thecour
twi
l
lfol
l
ow t
heconst
ruct
ion
whi
chthestat
uesprevi
ousl
yrecei
ved.
9.Incaseofadoptedst
atutes,
thei
nter
pret
ati
onoft
hecour
tfr
om wher
ethe
stat
utei
sadoptedshouldbeCONSIDERED.
10.
In caseofconfl
ictbet
weenacommonl
aw pr
inci
pleand ast
atut
ory
provisi
on,
thel
att
erpr
evai
ls.
Pr
ofessor
,St
atut
oryConst
ruct
ion
COLLEGEOFLAW
UNIVERSI
TYOFTHECORDI LLERAS

Share 1589175960727 Notes Statutory Construction A Compendium

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

You might also like

Share 1589175960727 Notes Statutory Construction A Compendium

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Share 1589175960727 Notes Statutory Construction A Compendium

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Notes

*Theauthor/softhelaw donothav ethepr e-

1. TESTOFMULTI PLEINTERPRETATI ON–when ast atuei

3. TEST OF ABSURDI TY OR UNREASONABLENESS – when a l it

LAW +FACTS =DECI

Statute-i sanactoft helegislatur

AUTHENTI CATI ONOFBI LLS

2.PREAMBLE-ist hepartofthest atutefol

1.TheSupr emeCour tinanappr opri

Itispr esumedt hatast atutewi l

d.Words,Phrases, SentencesandCont ext-theint

e.Headi ngsandMar ginalNotes-deter

C)Wor ds,PhrasesandSent ences,Context-Theintenti

(41 Southern Cr oss Cement Cor por

Thel anguageoft hestatuteaffordsthebestmeansofi t

DuraLexSedLex( Thelawmaybehar shbutitisthel

HOCQUI DEM PERQUAM DURUM EST,SEDITALEXSCRI

OPPOSITE MAXI MS:Li

“Consci enceandequi tyshoul dal waysbeconsi deredi ntheconst ruct i

DoctrineofLastAnt ecedentsr ulesreferst otheappli

Whenal istoftwoormor especi ficdescri

Wher east atutedescr i

Wher ethegener altermf oll

D)EXRESSIO UNIUSEST EXCLUSI

Wher east atut e,byi tst erms,i sexpr esslylimitedt ocer t

Wor dsmustbeconst ruedi nconj

 ReddendoSi ngulaSingulis(Leteachbeputi nit

Aequum etbonum estl

Juraenat uraeaequum estneminem cum al

Whenal istoftwoormor especi ficdescri

Eachwor dorphrasemustbegi veni

Descr ibedi nTheVer aCruz( 1884)10App.Cas.59as:" Now ifany thingbe

Note: Thel egi

- ABAKADA GURO PARTY v s.HON.CESAR PURI SIMA (GR NO.166715,AUG.

Not e:Rulestorememberont hemat tersorrepeal.

You might also like