Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • Statutory Construction Cases & Materials by JJ Laurel 1999 Revised Ed.

    Uploaded by

    Ysabel Allyna Munoz
    95 views103 pages

    Copyright

    © © All Rights Reserved

    Available Formats

    PDF or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    Report this Document

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as PDF or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    Download as pdf
    95 views103 pages

    Statutory Construction Cases & Materials by JJ Laurel 1999 Revised Ed.

    Uploaded by

    Ysabel Allyna Munoz

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as PDF or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    Download as pdf
    of 103
    STATUTORY CONSTRUCTION Cases & Materials by Atty. Jose Jesus G. Laurel 1999 Revised Edition rifx Book store ABOUT THE AUTHOR Atty. Jose Jesus G. Laurel finished his Bachelor of Arts degree (AB) major in Economics from the Atonco de Manila in 2646. He complated his Bachelor of Laws degree (LL.B,) from the ‘Ateneo Law School, Ateneo de Manila in 1961, receiving second hhonors. He placed 6th in the 1981 Bar Examinations, He thereat- fod his Master of Laws (LLM) at Yale Law School, University, New Haven, Connecticut, U.S.A. in 1984 with hhonors in Comparative Law and Law and Legal Process in J pan. He alco studied Business Management; Practices and Proe- esses (BMP) atthe Asian Institute of Management Jn 1986, he was sent on scholarship under the American Government Studies Program to the Mlinols Legislative Center at Springfield, Illinois, U.S.A. In 1987, he was sent on scholar Ship to the Institute of World Affairs in Salisbury, Connesticut, U'S.A to study International Financial Institutions ‘Atty, Laurel has taught Statutory Construction as well as other law subjects such as Corporation Lew, Partnership Low, SEC Rules & Decisions, Securities Act, Business Organization | G1 and Legel & Judicial Forms at the Atonco de Manila Law School, the College of Law of the University of the East (U.B.), and the College of Law of the Lycoum of the Philippines where he Was formerly the Dean. ‘The author is « Bar Reviowor in Corporation Law and Part: ership Law at the Ateneo Lew Schoo! Review. He was the Deputy Executive Director of the Securities and Exchange Com mission from 1960 to 1992. He is currently the General Couns find Corporate Secretary of PNOC- Bnergy Development Corpor tion and PNOC Coal Corporation and a director of PNOC Explo- ration Corporation. ‘The author of two other books, “A Pleader's Guide to Cita- tioas and Quotations in Statutory Constraction” and “Questions ‘nd (Simplified) Answers in Partnership Law, Atty. Laurel ‘arried to Leah S Laurel and has two daughters, Patricia, aged WG and Daniela, aged 1d, PREFACE Right after I passed the Bar in 1982, I taught Statutory Construction at the U-E, Colloge of Law and Lyceum of the Philippines Law School. I continwed to teach Statutory Construct tion after my return from Yale. I have since taught other law ‘ubjeta such as Corporation Lave, Partnership Law, SEC Rules find Decisions, Securities Act, Business Organization T and Il fand Legal snd Judicial Form as well handled bar reviews in Corporation Law and Partnership Law. However, Statutory Con struction is the subject T enjoy teaching the most. It i a very interesting eubject. The universality of the application of les rules eroases the boundaries of legal systems, elds of law and ‘ven the confines of time. Ie a also one of the most challenging ‘ubjects to teach ‘This book started out as a result of my lecture/discussion| notes before I had i first published sm 1990. The cases are Aigested for eagy reference, Of course, or the discussions to be fexeiting, the class should have read the cases in the original ‘While there are suggested ieues that the professor might like to discuss further with hishor clase, topics arc certainly not limited to those sapgestions very new class that I handle has something new to add Sometimes, even inthe old cases that Ihave discussed, there are ‘ew insighes and points of view ‘While certainly the rales of statutory construction are nec- say tools for our profession, these are tools fora purpowe, Le, thet justice is served. We are’not only legal eraftamen, but are fiers ofthe Court More importantly, wo are the King’s (Court's) food servants, but God's frst. ‘TABLE OF CONTENTS Chapter I GENERAL PRINCIPLES ‘What is Statutory Construction? Case; Caltex Philippines), Inc. vs. Palomer, T8SCRA 247 Why is It Important to Study Statutory ‘Construction? What isthe Fundamental Rie in the Construction of Statutes. z Does Statutory Construction invoive Questions (of Factor of Law’ ‘What isthe Nature of the ies of Statutory Conatraction? Case: P.CRI. vs. NTC, 191 SCRA 200 How do you Distinguish Construction from Interpretation 7 ‘When does Statutory Construction Come ta Casos: NFL. us, Eisma, 127 SCRA 419, Paat ve. CA. 77'SCAD 726, 266 SCRA 16, ‘Jan. 16, 1997 People vt. Mapa, 20 SCRA 1164, Loveriaa vs. TAC, 157 SCRA 263 Daoang ve. Mun. Judge of San Nica Toeos Norte, 159 SCRA 369 (1988) Read the Statute at a Whole (Context. Cases: AISA vs, NLRC, 82 SCAD 600, G.R. No, 113722, May 21, 997 onc Paras ur, COMBLEG, 76 SCAB 46, 264 SCRA 49, Nov. 4, 1994... Chapter STATUTORY CONSTRUCTION OR JUDICIAL Statutory Construction: Whose Jab is I? Overlap of Government Funetins; How dace "This Affect he Task of Seatatary Construction? ‘When i ie Conatraction and Wine i Judicial Tegisation? Cane: Flosses ve, Philex Mining Corp. T36SCRA 142. nthe Itue of Judicial Logiiation How Must Legislative latent be Ascertained? ‘Cases: Aisporna vs, C.A. and People 118 SORA 459 (1982) (China Bank vs. Ortega, 49 SCRA 366 ‘Board of Administrators ofthe PA, on Bavtists, 112 SCRA 89 Chapter LITERAL CONSTRUCTION ‘When Should Statutes be Literally Constreed? ‘Cases: Salvatorra vs. C.A., 73 SCAD 586, 4261 SCRA 45, Aug. 25,1986 apicanan ng mga Manggagawe sa Mela Railroad Company vs Matila Ralroad ‘Company, 88 SCRA 618 ‘When a Literal Construction Not Favored ‘57 SCRA 108 574) os, COMELEC, 76 SCAB 40, ‘264 SCRA 49,61, Nov. 4, 198 Chapter 1V ON EXECUTIVE CONSTRUCTION ‘What i the Rate on Rxacutive Construction? wo 15 20 20 a 2» a PAFLU vs. Bureau of Labor Relations, 72 SCRA 396 2. When ie Executive Construction Not ‘Given Welght? acces vo Cases: Philippine Apparel Worker’ Union NERC, 106 SCRA 444. IBAA Employees’ Union vs. Tacong. 132 SCRA 869 vneerecn (Chartered Bank Biaplayes’ Association vs. ‘Ope, 188 SCRA 279... 3. What i the Difference between a Rule and fn Opinion? wn E Chapter V SUBJECTS OF CONSTRUCTION AL The Constitution een 1. Define Constitaton ae 2. How should the Constitution be Const? (Canes: Sarmiento vs. Mison, O.R. No. 79874, Dee. 37,1967 Tevene, 152 SCRA 26¢ (1987) ‘3. May the Preamble be Referrd tin the “Gonatraction of» Constitutional Province (Cane: Aglipay 08 Rai, 64 Pil 201 4. In Cane of« Conflict between the Constitution ‘hd a Statute, which Prvaie? : (Case: Paras vs, COMBLEC, 76 SCAD 40, ‘264 SCRA, 49,61, Nov. 4, 1096, 5. Are the Provisions of the Constitution SelB ecuting? nen (Case: Manile Prince Hotel vs. SIS, =, ‘Git, No, 122156, Fb. 8, 1997, TOSCAD Thane reese 36 a 2 29 “ ©. Ordinances 1 2 Define Statte What ae the Diforat Bypoe of Statutes? ‘Wot in he DistcionBobeoen te Constitution nd Staaten? What are the Paes ofa Statute ‘What ste Single Subject Requirement ‘or Basing Lavat este. ‘Waa isthe Rate on Headings ‘What i he Procure forthe Passage ofa be What inthe President's Voto Power? How in Veto Gverridden? What ae the Requirements fr the Publication tba ‘Cases: Taada ve, Tuvera, 196 SORA 27 1969). Tanads x Tavers, 148 SCRA 446 C88) May the ‘Whoreas Clause’ be Avail fin the ‘Constrction of Statute? Cave: People vs, Behaves, 95 SCRA 663 Define Ordinance ‘What ithe Bale on she Construstion of ‘Ordinances vis-ete 8 State? Cases: Primicias vs Mun, of Urdanet, ‘Pangasinan, 98 SCRA 463 Bagatsing or Ramires, "re SCRA 806. ‘What is the Rule on the Construction of ‘Administrative Orders (nplementing ules and Rapulations) veeois a ‘Statute? case: Conte ve. CO.A, 76SCAD 16, "264 SORA 18,3, Now 50 0 6 a 6 Chapter VI INTERPRETATION OF SPECIFIC TYPES ‘OF STATUTES A. Penal Statutes 1, What isthe General Ral in the Interpretation ‘ot Penal Statutes? 2. When May this Role be invoked 4. this the only Factor inthe Construction ‘of Penal Statutes? Case: People or Manantan, § SCRA 684. 4. What ie the Rae onthe Reroactivity of Penal ‘Statutes? Are there Exceptions? [Are there any Exceptions tothe Exception? sn Bx Part Facto Law? 8. inane of Confer Btwoen Dictront Versions ofthe Revised Penal Code, Wht Shall B TaxLaws 1, What the Rule on the Construction of Tax Laws? Are there any Buseptions? ‘Aro thero any Bscoptons to the Breeption? How are'Tax Refiads Gonsivoad ‘Who Hine the Burdon of roan Tax Cases? Cases: CLR. vt CA, 82SCAD 45, 271 SCRA 805, April 18, 1997 ‘Mactan Cebu Int Alport Authority (GICIAA) es. Maron, 74 SCAD 296, 251 SORA‘667, Sope 11,1906. 44 How are Laver on Tax Sales Conatried? Cane: Serfino on, Court of Tax Appeals, 154 SORA 19 (1987) © Labor Laws a 1, What ia the Rule on the Constrction sf Labor Laws? Where athe Contained? 66 a 68 60 a n 6 6 (Cases: Casio, Je. ot. NLRC, 62 SCAD 726, ‘Go No, 118432, May 23,1997 Bustamante oz NLRC, 76 SGAD 688, 286 SCRA 61, 70, Nov. 28,1996. Manahan vs: B.C, 104 SCRA 196. Villavert ee E-C-C, 110 SCRA 253. el Rosario and Sone es. NLRC, 135 SCRA 659, coe 2. How are Retirement Laws Construed? oon ‘Are there Exceptions? 1. Wht athe Rl nin narration of Insurance Provisions? : ‘Clear Provision Given Ordinary Meaning (Couce: ‘Ty ue. Fiat Nat Surety and ‘Aes Co nc, 1 SCRA 1524 De la Crass. Coital Ine tnd Surety Co, Tne. ITSCRA 859." 1. Ambiguous Provision Intarprated Against Tasure aes xr Qs hue Ou La Uk Panaton os: Malayan in. Go, tne, CA Rep, 88. Alaporna ve‘ CA. & People, 113 SCRA 459 (1982)... Corporate Law nn What i the Rate on the Interpretation ‘of Corporate Lew Provisions? (Case: Home In. Co, os, Eartrn Shipping Tinos, 128 SCRA 425 (1983)... Naturalisation Laws A ‘What isthe Rule on the Construction of ‘Naturalization Laws? (Casor: Co ve. Republie, 108 Phil. 265 % 6 . 20 80 a 85 ‘Velaseo os, Republic, 108 Phil 294 ‘Lee Chow, Republic, 106 Pl 78. Agrarian Reform Laws ornnnnnnnn ‘What is th Reon the Construction of Agrarian ‘Reform Law : (Cane: Guerrero ou C.A, 142 SCRA 126 (1986). HL Rules of Court. nnns : 1. What is the Ralaon the Construction ofthe ‘Provisions ofthe Res of Cour? ‘Where fhe Contained nn onnen Case: Bellows, CA, 56 SCRA 509... 2 Dothe Rules on Appeal Apply to Admins trative Bodog ‘Cases: Cimenes vs. SEC, 153 SCRA B40 188 SCRA boo. 8. What othe Rule Regarding Period and 1. Bxpropriation Lawes se (Cave: City of Manila us. Chinese Community, “0 Pil 449. J. Debtor Protection Laws... (Case: Javallana ve, Mirae, 40 Phil. 763. K. Grants of Power to Local Governments... Le Bleotion Laws ssl - Case: Villanueva ve. Comele, THO SCRA 382 1985) on Me Walle cn 7 1 What athe Rule on the Interpretation oe wile aa 8 eage2 e88 eave: Tampoy ue, Alborastne, 107 Phil 100. 2, Why ie the Rule onthe Interpretation of Wille Stretr than that of Contracts? ‘8. What inthe Rule on Subetantia! Compliance ‘of Wills 4 Latin Bales on Wile (Chapter Vit PARTICULAR LATIN RULES Verba Lega (Cases: IBAA Employees’ Union ve Insiong, 182 SCRA 665 (1054) (Chartered Bank Employen’ Associa i Ople, 138 SCRA 273 nes Ale'Mode Garments, nc. os NLRC, 1B SCAD 736, 268 SCRA 497, 809 Ratio Leis fs Case: Viana os, Cases, 140 SCRA 388, Mens Legislatoris Cases: Prasalk ve. Republic, 98 Phi. 665. Matabuena os. Cervantes, $8 SCRA 364 Diora Lex Sed Lex ‘When Do We Apply Dura Lax Se tax tindor Ratio Legis? - (Cason: People ur. Macarandang, 106 Phil. 715 ‘People vs. Mapa, 20 SCRA 1164 People ue Santayana, 74 SCRA 38. Bepresio Uniug, Bat Exclus AlAa® oon ‘Cases: Ropublicue Etenzo, 90 SCRA 68111880) Acosta ws: Far, § PB 18 People es Mapa, 20 8CRA 1164 When isthe Rule inapplicable? Case: Poople vs, Manaatan, 5 SCRA 684 100 100 or 102 108 104 104 108 108 109 208 Bjusdem Generis — 1. What ithe Rule of Bjurdem Generis? 2 When Do We Apply the Rule of Buadem ‘Generie? : o ‘Caves: Mutue ve. Comes, 36 SCRA 226 Gatieo oe. Union inn. Society ‘ofCamilon, 40 Phil. 40, 8, Whon isthe Rule of Bjusdem Gener applicable? When the Legiative Inte Already ‘Apparent (case: People us. Behaves, 95 SCRA 653 Ui Sto Nite, 19 Phil 142 When the Spee Words ae of ifort Court ‘of Tax Appeals, 48 SCRA 182, When there ano Uncertainty (Case: Roman Catholic Archbishop ‘ot Manila vs. SSC, 1 SCRA 10, anus Omisavs sn 1. What isthe Bale of Cabs OmiB6¥8? ons 2 What i the Canue Ominous Qastrieive) ule ie os cases: People vx. Mananten, 6 SCRA 684. ‘SEC Legal Opinion e: BIR Employees ‘Ase. Tne, O25, 1887, 8, What i the Casvs Omlaeus Permissive) ule. (Case: Loper vt CA, 100 Pil. 850 Nossitur A Soci. ‘What lathe Ral of Noseltar A Solis? CCasee: Sanciangco os, Roo, 137 SCRA 671 ‘Alsporaa vs. CA, 113 SCRA 488... ‘CALTEX Cilipince vs. Palomar, SCRA 247 Cave 209 209 109 109 am 2 ne us ne ue m 12 cemapter vats ‘CONSTRUCTION OF WORDS AND PHRASES Ordinary Meaning S i "May" and Shall (Coser: Dir. of Lands vx. C-A. 85 SCAD 92, 216 SCRA 776, Jaly 28,1997 ‘asada ve Tavera, 136 SCRA 27 (1085) CCapat es: Ocampo, 118 SCRA 709 (1982) Basiana ve. Lune, 103 SCRA 49 (1981), POFI ve. NTC & PLDT, 125 SCRA 154 (1989) - OFT os, NTC & PLDT, 151 SCRA 200 (1984) nn or" and And” ‘case: GMRC, Tae e. Bell Telecomm. Phi The, 82 SCAD 205, 271 SCRA 190, ‘Apel 30,1997 Principally and Exsl0Nv69 oo i Case: Alfons, Republic, 97 SCRA 359 (1980, Exclusively 7 4 Previously Soi (Case: Rursvs. Lopena, 197 SCRA 121 (1985) “avery (Case: NHA ve. Juco, 136 SCRA 172 (1988). “Torn and “Tenure” dette Case: Apart vt. Court of Appeal, 127 SCRA 291 (1968) SURO 0g nen ‘What i the io on Surplasages? men (Case: Demailes ve, COMELEC, 0. No: L-28906, De. 28,1987 ooo Punctuation, 25 136 ie 9 138 Mo Mi Me we ae Case: Arabay vs. CPL of Zambosnge Del Norte, 2 SCRA cL? USion Hart, 28 Phil 349 11, Past Tense Case: Grogo vs. COMELEC, 83 SCAD 823, '2r4 SORA 481, June 10,1997 12, Other Examples (Case: People os. Maja, 34 SCAD 246, 278 SCRA 137, July 7, 1997 Chapter 1 SPECIAL OVER GENERAL Gene Specialibus Non Derogant 1. How ia thi Rule Applied in Conicting ‘Provisions ofthe Same State? eases: Manila Railroad Co, ve. Collet ‘of Custome, $2 Phil 980 Almeda on. Florentino, 15 SCRA Sid Lichauco ve, Apostal, 44 PIL 288 won 2. How is this Rule Applied in Conflicting Provisions “of Diferent Statutes? Cases: Sitchon vs, Aquino, $8 Phil. 88 ‘Laxamana ve. Baltazar, £2 Phil 32 Dedoya ve. Lantin, 19 SCRA 83. Butuan Sawmill ee, Cty of Butuan, T8SCRA 227 oa Lagman or City of Manila, 17 SCRA 878. ‘Stapata oe Jaym, 51 Pal 654. 8. What the Hale in Case of Conflict Botweon 1 Special Provision of« General Last find General Provision of Spectal Law? (Canoe: Bagataing oe. Hamires, 74 SCRA. 306 ‘Teotio os, City of Manila, 22 SCRA 267 Davide COMELEC, 81 SCAD 48 1271 SCRA 80, Api 8, 1997 M46 ue ue 1st 169 183 188 189 1 ee Chapter x EXTERNAL AIDS When Resorted To Histories! Setting an rian ofthe Statute zt : (Cases: Carolina Industries CMS. ‘Stockbrokerag, Ine, 97 SCRA ‘34a080) . : Us. 08. De Gotan, 30 Phil 416 (Ortigas ve. Peal, 94 SCRA 633 ome Ine. Coes) Baatern Shipping Line 123 SORA #2600 Legislative Debates 4. When are Legislative Debates Useful? Case: China Bank os, Ortega, 40 SCRA S36 = 1. When are Legislative Debates Not Usefl? Cases: Manila Jockey Club, ine. vt. Gamen ‘and Amusement Bosrd, Gt No, Utara, 2, 1960, omen Catholic Archbishop of Man ee SSC, 1SCRA 10 (961) ange (Cantomporeneous Act of the Legislature. (Case: David ve, Comes, 81 SCAD 482, 1271 SCRA 8, April 8, 1097 Chapter x1 PRESUMPTIONS ‘What isthe Poaumption in Favor of Validity of Legislative Acs? ue: Naina Hsing Authority Rays, 128 SCRA 25 ns ‘What isthe Presumption agaaet Exerajudisil “Applieation of Statues? = 163 163 ie ee 165 16s 166 187 ie er ‘What isthe Presumption against Ineffectiveneat ‘ot States? ‘What isthe Presumption in Favor of Benefial ‘Operation of Statutes? os. CA, TCAD 126, ‘266 SCHA 167, Jan. 10,1997 Sesbreao us. CA, 81 SCAD 62, {270 SCRA 360, Marth 24,1997 soon What the Presumption spat Retropective ‘Operation? aunt (Case: Grogo vs. Comelec, 83 SCAD 929, 114 SCRA 481, June 19, 1997 What is the Presumption agalne Injurtic? What i the Presumption again Inonvenionss? What i the Presumption gainet Abeurdity? What i the Preromption against Uncertainty? ‘What inthe Presumption of Conitutionalty? (Cane: NHA vs. Reyes, 125 SCRA 245, What isthe Presumption of Consiteney? ‘What ls the Presumption asta Public Poi? What is the Presumption of Acquescense ‘of Judilal Construction? What is the Presumption as to Foreign Laws? (Cate: Procter and Gamble Phils. Mf. Corp. ‘x, Comm. of Custom, 28 SCRA GD) What i the Presumption Against Violation ‘Internationa Law? ‘What inthe Presumption Against Implied Repeal? anen P REPEALS ‘What isa Repel How are Repeats Distinguished fom “smendaeata How are Ropenla Distinguished fom Suspension? ‘What isthe Civil Code Provision on Repent 168 170 m m2 me us i my m at m v8 v6 16 M6 |S. What is the Rule onthe Retroaetvity of Repeats? (Cate: Tae-An of. CA, 197 SCRA 808 cmon A. Express Repeals ‘When is thore Bxpress Repeal? 7 DB. Implied Repeals : 1. What isthe Presumption against implied Repeal? 2, Whavare the Regulates fr aa impliod Repeal? : Cases: Villegos v8, Subido, OR: No, L817, Sept. 30,1987 iy. ia) ‘oimener oe. SEC, 1a SCRA B40 Grago ,Comelee, 88 SCAD 923, ‘PA SCRA 481, June 19, 1897 3, What inthe Presumption Against Impli Repeal in Ponal Lawes C, Later Ovor Earlier Z D. Im Part Materia... = [Append A Civil Cofe Provisions on Interpretation Contrasts a : Appendix B: Roles of Court Provisions on ‘nterpresation of Documents 200 — a wT 18 19 180 180 361 ae 186 Chapter! GENERAL PRINCIPLES |. WHAT IS STATUTORY CONSTRUCTION? CASE: Caltex (Philippines), Inc. vs. Palomar, 1escRA 247 (hing the definiton in Black's Law Dietinary) Construction is 2. WHY ISIT IMPORTANT TO STUDY STATUTORY CON- ‘STRUCTION? FOR THE LAW STUDENT. ‘Statutory Construction ia bet taken in the iat year, ret crably inthe Bat semester. Tt ‘BuesRry Gonstraction eobeo ravers ‘These cases give the freshman an ey (eptectnton of the complenity and variety of low study All the snonenae, The ‘helaw atudent OR THE LAW PRACTITIONER. any recall f the rules of Statutory Construction learned ring law school enables the practitioner to-ably prepa landings and court arguments and to anticipate with reasonable. {sturay whata wry adversary would-ore ar defense jes ‘or counterrargumentin-easee involving. interpretation fe ‘contracts and/or sanstraction of etatates ‘FOR THE COURT CLERK OR RESEARCHER. ‘The power-to-interpet-and.construe-lawsisetsentilly : ‘A mantry-ot the subject nmuree the prepare ‘ion-and-drafting-f-decsionsand-eports that an eteei sgsinst any appellate seratiny FOR THE LAWMAKER AND HIS STAFF. ‘An understanding ofthe status of past 5 rquisite for the prom in of ture statutes, Ambigud> sartetenar Yr natebl atti saatatndebareds 2 g00d lawmaker (or staff, vertod inthe Res of Stat tory Construction, tries ta i 1arsconsteution inthe Jawa that hee daftng, For THe HOUSE COUNSEL. ‘A ank lawyer or house counsel 3, WHAT IS THE FUNDAMENTAL RULE IN THE CON. STRUCTION OF STATUTES? ssaex Peerage 11844], C1. & F149; Fordyce vs. Bridges W847), 1HLC1, 0) 4. DOES STATUTORY CONSTRUCTION INVOLVE QUES- ‘TIONS OF FACT OR OF LAW? Secondly, thelr egal ffs, or the effect hich sto be vento them. The meaning of the words I ake tobe 8 {iestion of fact in ll ees whether we are dealing {ith poom oF a legel document. The effect ofthe WNords'g'a question af law” (Chateney ve Bronlian Submarine Pelegroph Co, {18811,1@B.79 at p88 per Lindley US 5. WHAT IS THE NATURE OF THE RULES OF STATU- ‘TORY CONSTRUCTION? CASE: PCPA vs. N-.C, 191 SCRA 200 (Discussed in detail under the Chapter on Words land Phrases, MAY" and SHALL) “Any lawyer of modest sophistication knows that ‘nent ‘Tactice Abad Santon) 6. HOW DO YoU DISTINGUISH CONSTRUCTION FROM INTERPRETATION? “Strictly speaking, construction and interpreta- tion are nt the some, though the two term are often luted intarchangenbly. Conerotin, however, tobe tech tain the meaning of word found in a satus, may ‘oveal a meaning different from that appereat when ‘the word a considered ebatracty or when given sts ‘tal meaning. But when the eourt goes beyond the Tanguage of the statate and socks the aeistance of ‘ _srarurony coxsmmucrto ‘xtrinvionid in order to determine whether © given ae fll within the state, ‘The procs tobe used in any case wil depend upon the nature of the problem pretented. And, a is apparent, ‘oth proceoee maybe ned in ssking the legiaatve intent ina given statute. ‘on "(Taken from Statutory Contraction, Interpret ton of Law, Crawford, pp 240-24), WHEN DOES STATUTORY CONSTRUCTION COME CASE: NF-L. ve. EISMA, 127 SCRA 419 Pacte: ‘The employer fled a suit for damages for obstruction of private property against the labor anion before the Regional ‘Trial Court of Zemboenga City. The court denied the waton't ‘Motion to Dismiss. The union fled petition for certiorari before ‘he Supreme Court Teauet _Doos the RTC have juradietion over the cae? Hola: ‘The original wording of Article 217 vested the labor arbiter with juriedietion. So t wan applied by thie Court in Gare se Martine: (84 SCRA'871) and im Bengron vu Inciong (01 SCRA 248). On May 1, 1978, however, Prosideatial Deeree No. 1967 was ited, amending Article 217 and provided “that the Re onal Directors shall not inderee and Labor Arbiters shall ol ntertainslaime for morel nd other forme of damegee” The ‘rdinary courts Were thas vested with jridictio to award ne. ‘al and moral damages in the ease of ilegal dames of om ployset. That isnot, as pointed out by the Selictor General the ‘ed ofthe story, or on May 1, 1960, Presidential Decree No 1601 was isuued, further amending Artici 217, returning the origina Jriadition to the labor arbiters, thus enabling them to deride that "3. All money caine af workers, including thowe based on nonpayment or underpayment of wags, vertine compensation, ‘eparaton pay and ater bones provided by la or appropriate Sgreement, except clnime for employes’ compensation, so Sscrity, medicare sod materaity benefit (amd) (8) All ot claims arising rom omployersmploee relations unletexpresly faladed by thie Cole” An equally conclsive manifestation of ihe lak of jarsition of Court of Prt Instance thea, 8 Regional Trial Coort now, Baan Pambanon Bg 190, amends {ng Artcte 217 ofthe Labor Cade tok eft on August 21, 12861 Subparagraph 2, paregraph () la now warded thu 2) {hore that invalve agen, Boure af work and other arms and Conditions of employment This x tobe coped wits the {ermer phrasolgy (2) snrerleed ive in collective bargain ing, inetuding tha hat invelve wageo, hours of work, and ster terma and condition f employment nto be ated at Betas 130 made mo change with reapet to the orginal {sndexcusivejuraditon of Labor Avoiter with respect to money ‘Inno workers or cnn fr mages sing fro eplayer Smlayee relma Nothing becomes clearer, tharefre than the meritorious character af tin postion. Certtarrt and probit respond tnt Judge blog Sovold of jariadetion to ct onthe maar ‘Article 217 tobe applied the way i is worded. The exc sive aig uiditon eb laboreriate tren reed for ‘ent It meana, and ican only monn that» Court of Fiat Tamtanee judge then,» gional al Cours judge now, crtiniy 2s beyond he ope of tne satorty conor to hm by law Shon he entertined the autor damage, arising fom picketing int accompanied strike: That wan squarely within the express term of the aw ay deviation cannot hertore, be tolerated “xx it a boon the constant rating of thi Cort even prior toLisaraga Hermanos oe Yop Pico 41019 dsm, To ringing Stor ofthe ponenel of Jonice Moreland wl eal for abediene, Tune frac and fundamental duty of court, nour judgment, {st apply the law Constraction and interpretation come only ter Irhas been demonstrated that application sponse of {Sadogeats without them, Ita so even afer the lapon of ety (nthe presse question at stand, this Court ha bor arbiters, nt a court, that possess orignal sad exclusive uriadie: ‘on over claims for damages arising from picketing or sre. Note: The uncortainty here a merely on what i the state of lew at this parccular point a time This was easly resale by imply looking a the history and chronology of ll the pertinent les, There ie a of yt, no statutory amblguly that warrants fn application of statutory construction CASE: Pant vs. CA, 77 SCAD 726, 266 SCRA 167, Jan. 10,1997 When tho statute-i cles-and-explst there is harlyany-rom for extended rtointion rato eaten othe law People vs. Mapa, 20.SCRA 1164 (Glucussed in detail under DURA LEX SED LEX, {in Chapter Vid CASE: Leverisa va. LA.C, 187 SCRA 282 (Giscussed In detail under SPECIAL OVER GEN. RAL CASE: Daoang vs. Mua. Judge of San Nicolas Tocos Norte, 159 SCRA 369 (1088) Pacts: ‘The Agony spouses filed a petition for adoption of two sminors before the Municipal Court of San Niclas, Hocos Nore, ‘The grandehildren of the Agonoy spouses (children of their de ceauod daughter oppowed th adopton arguing thet thet grands ‘parents were disqualified from adopting under Art. 825 f the ‘Civil Code, which provides: “Art 895. The following cannot adopt (2 ‘Those who have loptimate, logitimated, scknowledged natural childeen, or natural shldren by ‘Tue jade ovecraed the opposition The grandchildren raised ‘he matior tothe Supreme Court Held: ‘The words used in paragraph (1) of Art, $35 of the Git code in enamerating the parsons who eanmet adapt ae elear land unambiguous The children mentioned tnereln havea clearly Aefined meaning in law and, ae pointed out by the respondent jaudge, do not inshode grandchildren Well known is the rule of statutory construction tothe effet ‘hat a statue, clear and unambiguocs an its face, need not be seri dare ig agg tory construction DISCUSSION POINT: What isthe rationale be: dnd this Artile? Do you think therationae is achloved with thie ruling? [READ THE STATUTE AS A WHOLE (CONTEXT). ‘hata an ialaed part or particular provision alone ‘NERC, 62 SCAD 600, GR No. 111722, May 27,1997), CASE: Paras vs, COMELEC, 78 SCAD 48, 264 SCRA 49, Nov. 4, 1094 Srpsing that under Sec. 74() of the Local Government Code (RA ‘hall take place within one (1) yer from the fuoumptlon to alice ar one (1) year immedi. ately preceding o regular election” Since anotver Republic Act hha’ set the Sangguniang Kabataan (SK) elections on the first Monday of May 1996, and the Supreme Court in an early eu ruled that a SK election ix a ropular election, then no Feel ‘lection can be held. The Supreme Court ieued a PRO. ‘The entre Section 74 ofthe Loal Government Code reads See. 74. Limitations on Rect. — (8) No ecal shal take place within one (D) year from the date of the sfcial'r assumption to ofce oF fone (1) ear immediately preceding a regular lea le [Tore are several statutory constrection principles dh cussed here] fi [na rule in statutory construction that every pat of the statute must be interpreted with referenca tothe Conte, fe that overy part ofthe ataate must be considered together with the other parts, and kept subeervient othe general iatent ofthe ‘whole enactment. The evident intat of Section 74 is to subject fn elective local oa to recall lection once during bis term of ‘fice. Paragraph (0), construed together with paragraph ly ‘merely designates the period when such clotive loeal ffi ‘ay be the subject ofa recall lection, that iy during the steond {ear of his term ef office. Thus, subsenbing to petitioners iter Dretatin ofthe phrase regular loa! election to inside the SKC ‘ction will undaly cireunseribe the novel provision ofthe Loca Government Code on recall, « mode af removal of public oficors ‘by initiation ofthe people before the end af hi erm, And if the ‘Skeleton which is set by B.A. No. 7808 tobe held very three (@) years from May 1006 were tobe deemed within the purview of the phrase “regular locl election” an erroneously insisted by petitioner, then no recall election ean be conducted, rendering {utile th reall provision ofthe Loe! Government Cade the interpretation of a statute, tho Court should start. with the astumption thatthe lapslature intended to enact am “fective law, and the lgislature e not presumed tohave done a ‘ain thingin the enactinent ofa statute, An interpretation should, Sf possible, be avoided under which matate or provision being construed is defeated, or ap otherwise expressed, nullifed, der Stroyed, emasculated, repealed, explained away, or rendered is. Smificant, meaningless, inoperative, nugatry. Ue Ukowis a base precept in statutory construction tht a statute shouldbe interpreted in harmony with tho Conatietion ‘Thus, the Interpretation of Seton T4 of the Local Government Code specically paragraph (b) thereof, shoul nat bei conict ‘withthe sonetitational Constitution to “enect a local government code which shall pro- ‘ide for a more recponsive end accountable loval government Structure instituted through a system of decontraliation with ‘fete mechanisms of recall, altiative, and vetrendum X23" Moreover, ptione’ too Ural Interpretation of the law lead to abr wes cannot cantante Tein eas, the Goer made the flowing adsonion: “We admoninhagsne oo eral ending of he tow as this apt contra tha Durpon and detent the Intention of authors. The TStnton aval fond no in heater tht et Sot he spit hat viet x 3c spr, rather than the Inter of lw, detains ie construct hanes "stata, wit ens te Fea Searing tite prt end ntent (Note:The ins bocrme moat, The scheduled barangny elocon was erly? month sway) Chapter 1, STATUTORY CONSTRUCTION: WHOSE JOB IS IT? “To declare what the law shall be i legislative power, but to declare what the law ior has been ls Midieal"(Flete vo Nicharton 64 L eA. p84), 2. OVERLAP OF GOVERNMENT FUNCTIONS; HOW DOES THIS AFFECT THE TASK OF STATUTORY CON- Sraucrion? Under the 1987 Constitution, we have returned to the Pesi- ental form of government earlier provided for ander the 1885 ‘Constitution, Presidential ileal characterized by atop ration of powers asthe same is nderttad under the American pattern of government” In realty, however, these functions do na ft ito sparate airtight compartments, but elem overlap, “The American government is commonly spoken of as one with separation f powere, s designation later referred to as'separated and coordinated powers, broad, because ofthe belie of the dominant postion Of the president, it le better known ax ‘prosdential™ Government or Prenideatisiem’ Ar har en pointed out previously, the trm ‘powers’ Sgurative rather than ractoral, shoald be replaced by functions denoting fren areas of sate ativty, ‘The early concept of a sect and rigid separation ‘ot functions used by bith the American and contempo ‘anoous French contittional theory and practice, sp Dears an artificial product, period and environment an Aitioned bythe speculative ratinaliom ofthe elight- fenmant, Te was nurtured by the Newtonian mechani: bie premises Into Use wociopoitie! resi sod napired by the bell that the equilibrium established between, the several power holers will eit in the permanent harmony ofthe state aoeely. Tse assumption thatthe Dower holders in equlpace would voluntarily dedicate ‘hemaelves to cooperation forthe common welfare ws piyeholopiealy unsound. It neglected to he per, the ‘workable ‘ition, az clearly demonstrated by the French Constitution of 1791, which attempted to apply ‘Montesquie’s separetion af fonctions to a practi! test” Bernas, The 1973 Philippine Constitution, Notes ‘3nd Case, pp. 65:66), ‘Tho great ordinancos of the Constitution do not xh ie ele ec nd white Een he ‘more specific of thom are found ta terminate in Tumbra shading gruel ore one extreme to tse ‘ther: ustiee Holmes; Springer oe Government, 271 US 1b, 210-212, 72 Led, 845,85; cited in Florence vs. Philes ining Corporation, 196 SCRA 141, 169) ‘Thore are, thus, in reality, overlae in the functions of government natend ofa clear-cut airtight delineation Meh mt ers Lesistve ceeusaeee Diagram 1 1 thus appears ‘rom our diagram above, that there are ‘throw areas of overlap, Ateae 1, and & ‘Area 1 Is the overlap between the exeetive and the legals: tive fonctions This area has been Tees smaleng powers of the exeovtive, Tie a Eimer exceeded aes ae ‘Whoo the executive branch usually through one of its cles) goes beyond the allowable overlap of Area, Fe, delogated Tle-making power, end extend to the shaded aren, te exercise tts ralosmaking power excood the legislative grant and wil be stricken out by the judiciary ax ultra vires, Cases on this ‘verlap are decunted in succeeding chapter, ‘The next area of overlap in dlagram one Ie Area 2, whichis the overiap between the exerative and the judicial branch, This sretoveia can in tar be npogue in fern yen overlap ie i ee eee {Court ofthe decisions of these agencies exercising ua judiial ‘Tho second aubsarea of overlap is Area 2-B. In certain in stances, the Judiiory allows the executive br ‘ets of the loisatve branch, This refereed fo Interpretation of tates In more caver, tis executive interpre {ation although aot conclusive upon the court, ix given substan tial weight. Of coarse, there are instances when this executive Interpretation straye beyond the tolerable overlap. Bescutive ‘onstruction ie tested a2 sara chapter and cases aro lee ‘teed where executive construction was allowed or discarded, ‘The third area of overlap, which ie af primary concern in our study of Statutory Construction, the overlap between the ude ‘nd the legiatve Branches. This la treated separately in the next chapter 1g may strike the reader os rather odd that the executive branch encforches onthe fanstone af bth the Judicial and legis lative branch although there appear to be no encroschment on [Re own territory. The exacaive, however, ceded teritry to both Under Section 6 (6), Article XI ofthe 1987 Constitution, the Supreme Gourt aa the power to “appoint all officals and tinployes of te judiciary in accordance with the Civil Service Line” Agnin under Section 6 ofthe ame article, "the Supreme Dis " “staturony consraverion Court shall have gdminiatrative supervision over all courts and personnel therea Likewise, Sotion 16 8) of Article VI ofthe 2087 Consit- tion provides that "each Houas may determine the rues of Hs proceedings. The administrative supervision of ite own depart ent is a,neceesary requisite or judilal and legislative inde. While the power to declare what the law is or has boon concededly judicial thet fanetion rometines treade dangerously into legislative damain. We have seen in diagram } that one of the areas of functional overlap is that between the legislative and the judicial branche ‘That portion of diagram 1 ie repre ‘Based ere fn detail Diagram 4 (Sed {in Bloresca ve Philer Mining, discusted i detail net page) was raferring to when he said that Sjudges do and mist leglate, ut ‘hay ean do so only interstitials hey are confined from malar vo molecular." Iie aloin this ares what Arile 9 of the Civil Code ‘war referring to. Said article provides that “No judge or court. stall delin to rondor judgment by reason ofthe lence, obseu- ‘ty or ineucloncy flaw Beyond Area 3, othe shaded area on Diagram 4 above, what we can Yefer tas the aren ofudica legislation or some. times more harahly referred toa judi tyranny its own boundaries, the interpretation of where that boundary les varies widely depending’ on time, polices, types of laws involved, and oven the ilonymorases of diferent Jigs and Justices. To determine where we are now or where we ‘ware at any particular paint in me inthis judicial loginative “order war” would require a separate treatne, The feader a, however, even a few representetive cases to get a limp of his on-ping debate “lt doesnot scam to nocd argument t show that however we may distingulh it by velling words we do ‘ot and eannot carey out the distinction between lois: lative and executive action sith mathemetia! pect ‘son and divide the Branches into waterght compar ‘ments, were it aven a0 desirable todo oy which am {ar trom believing Ut iti, o thatthe Constittion 90 equires” Justice Holmes: Springer vs. Government, BTU. 168, 210212, 72 Led 84,859 ited in Florerca te Philex Mining Corporation, 180 SCRA 161, 169) 3. WHEN IS IT CONSTRUCTION AND WHEN 18 IT SUDICIAL LECISLATION? CASE: Floresca vs. Philex Mining Corp. ieseka Ta Several miners were killed in a eavedn at one of Phlox Mining Corporation's mine sites. The eles of the miners were able to recover under the Workmen's Compensation Act (WGA), ‘Thereater, a special committee report indicated that the company failed ta provide the miners with adequate aulety p ‘The heirs decided to le complaint for damages before the (OFT (gow RTO) of Mane Philex led s Motion to Dismiss on the ground that the ‘ction waa bared on an Industral scident which in covered tunder the WGA ang, therefore, the CPI has no juriadicion over ‘the case. Philex arguce thet work-connected injuries a Compennable exclusively under Sucions 5 and 48 af the WA, ‘which provides ‘Section 6, Exclusive right 10 compensation, — ‘he rights and remedies granted by this Act to on ilove by retan of eon intry enti him focompensation shal exclade all other righte and rem. fies acerung to the employes, his personal Tepre- Sentatives, dependents or neareat of kin agalaat the mplayer under the CWil Cade and other laws because fata injury sxx" “Section 46, Juridiction.—‘The Workmen's Com- pensation Commissioner shai have exclusive juried. fion to hear and decide calms fr compensation under ‘the Workmen's Compensation Act subject to appent to "he Supreme Cour, xe PPhilex further contends that the WCA covers work-com nected ncidenta even ifthe employer was negligent as the WCA, Under Section A imposes 80% additonal compensntion inthe ‘vent that the employer wae negligent. ‘The heirs, howover contend tht the CPI has jovndition at thei complaint ja not besod on the WGA but on the Civil Code provisions on damages avai out of negligence, ‘The CFI dismisaed the complaint for lack of juriaiction, ‘The heirs questioned the dismiaaal before the Supreme Court, amet Does the CFI have juriedieton over th complaint? Hela: Mafority Opinion: Makasiae, J Several opinion (amicus caroe! were nivanced a tothe suture af the remedies proved fr under the WGA, namely CUMULATIVE — Jonice Lazaro ia ofthe opinion that the here ay film compiin for dragon (les afer ‘orm companatin snr the WA withthe rp cours Soke hanno he nopigence oan emplyer parma te ‘Civil Code provisions. teen 2) EXCLUSIVE — Atty. (now Senator) Angara believes that resovery ander the WCA in excluive and therefore pre- tludes an ction of damages under the Civil Code 8) SELECTIVE — Atty. Bacungan believes thatthe rem: dice are aeletive, Le, the helra bad the option of choosing tetween availing of ths compensation onder the WCA or ling ‘clon for damages arising out of negligence under the provs ff the Civil Code If the heirs had ehooen ono remedy and have ‘Sllected under that remedy, they can nolongor aval ofthe other remedy ‘The allegations ofthe complain indicate that there was o breach of contract which may justify an award for damages {der the pertinent provision ofthe Civil Code. The queetion| ‘ow is whethor or not the action for damages wl prosper, not (ruhetanding the fact thatthe eles have already received com: pensation under the WCA ompensaion distinct from existing theories on damages. Reco ‘ry under the WCA te not based on any theory onthe pat of the mplayer, ‘Since the two remedios are dstnet and the heirs have the option of eelecting which remedy to avell of, are the heirs now Dreshaded from selecting the romedy under the Civil Code, con ‘idering that they had already availed of (and recelved compen ation) under the WCA? ‘The heirs havea choice but they cannot pursue bath choices simultaneously ‘The Court, however, noted thet the heirs only learned of the negligence report ater they hed already availed and received ‘compensation under the WCA; they thus could not make an intalligant and informed choice at the time they opted fr the WCA rome ‘The heiea were thus allowed to pursue the Civil Code em cy but they arnt entitedto recover under bath remedies. Any payment they received under the WA shal be deducted from fhe court's eward of damages, if any. ‘of social jutio and the protee tion of labor. Article 178 ofthe Labor Cade and Article 1702 of the Civil Code both mandate that any doubt in the conection of labor laws should be construed in favor of labor curious that the dissenting opinion clings to the myth re thatthe courts cannot legilate. That myth has been exploded by ‘Article 9 ofthe Civil Cade which provides that “No judge oF court shall decline to render jude mont by reason of the silenca, obscurity or ine ‘oney of he law.” Hence, even the lgilator himself, uhrough Article 9 of the Civil Code, recognizes that in certain instances, he Court, in the Tanguage of Justice Holmes, ‘do and must lopialte'ta fil in the gape in the law: beenuse the mind of the legislator, lik all Roman beings, is nite end therefore cannot envisage all pei ble cases to which the law may apply. Nor has tho human mind ‘the Infinite capacity to anticipate al etuations Dissenting Opinion; Melens Herrera, J ‘Compensation and damages are synonymous ‘Tho WCA remedy is exclsive, ‘The WCA proceedings area finished transaction, Even assuming that the remedies are selective, the ‘ners havo already made their chole aad have necepted the benefits thereof. At the very las, ifthey want to make a recond| ‘lection on the argument that the fat one was a ilaaformed hoice, they should retura the amounts they resived from the wea 5. When the court gives effect toa statute notin accord ance with the intent ofthe lawmaeer, the eourt i unjuifibly Tegisating Dissenting opinion; Gutierren, 1 eahould be the legal remove the exclusionary pro 2. The WCA is «compromise In return forthe nea cor. telnty of recaving © sum of money fixe bythe law, the injared orker gives upthe right to sobjec the employer ta toe suit for huge amounts of damages, Thu, bit at only disregards the lomont of fault but i sala pre-determined amount based on the wages of the injured worker and, in certain cass, the acto on. The worker doce nat receive the total ‘in and suffering which he could otherwise ‘laim ina vil ait, The employer is required to act awiftly onthe Compensation dais: An administrative agency superice the Program. And because the overwhelming hast of workingmien idividval workers images must yield to ‘rho may want to se for big amount The interent ofthe entire working eles 8. Tho schedule of compensation, the rates of payment, ‘the compensable injuries and diseases, the premiums p employers to the present fully studied before the integrated scheme Was enacted Into lew 1 the court disregards ths totality of the scheme in a spirit ‘of gonerosity and recast some parts f the syotem without tuch- ‘ng the related others, the entire structure ie endangered. ; Seaeee sai Suggested dzcusion points: la the case of Mon Prince Hotel vs. GSTS, eit, G.R, No. 122136, Pe. 3, 1007, 78 SCAD 764, Justice Panganiben, in his sepa ‘rate dstenting opinion, labelled the majority opinion ‘br unadalterated judicial lpislation” Do you agree? HOW MUST LEGISLATIVE INTENT BE ASCER- ‘TAINED? CASE: Alsporna vs. C.A. de People TneSCRA as sa) @e Castro, J ponents) Pacts: Mapalad Alaporns was the wife of Rodolfo Aisporns, who an authorised insurance agent of Pola Compania de Seguros. Ii, Alaporna, however, has not procured certifies of thor: ‘hy from the Insurance Commiioner ‘Alsporna and ‘Acertnin Bugeni S. aidro wont tothe house of Mr. & Mrs vg to renew his accident insurance policy. Ae Ind wes away, Mrs, Aispornafenued'a new Pai her Mrs. Aiaporna was lata prosscuted before the City Court of CCabanataan for violation of See. 189 of th Insuranco Act. The {formation charged Me. Aisporna with having acted 8 a in france agent without previously obtnning a certificate of a {horty fom the lngurtte Commissioner aa required by Sec 189 tt the Insurance Act.‘The information dd not allege that Mrs. ‘Aisporna received compensation for her service. ‘Mrs, Aspoma, however, maintained that she was not inble ‘because she mercly ssisted her husband and that she did not Feceive any compensation therefor. ‘The trial court nonetheless convicted her, said conviction sssirmed by both tse CRT andthe Court of Appeals ‘Sec, 189 of he Insurance Act provides: “Ne insurance company doing business within the Philippine Islands, nor sny agent theres, shall pay ‘ny commission or other compensation to any person for services in sbtainig new insurance, neat such person shall have fist procered from the Insurance Eommivsioner n sertiinte of authority to act as an agent of such company a6 hersinafter provided. No Deraon shal act a agent, rub-egen, or broker in the Enlcitation or procurement of appliations for insur ‘ince, or receive fr services in obtaining new insur thee, any commission or ather compensation from any Insorsnce company doing business in the Philippine Illande, or agent thereat, without fist procuring « Certifeate of authority s0 to act from the Tnaurance {Comtlationer, which anust be renewed annually ofthe first day of January, oF within six months therester ‘Such certificate shal be iaeued by the Insurance Com- ‘missioner only 0

    You might also like