GENERAL PRINCIPLES IN THE CONSTRUCTION OF STATUTES

I. STATUTES MUST BE READ AND CONSTRUED AS A WHOLE

It is basic that a statute must be read and construed in its entirety. Hence, each
provision of the statute should be construed in relation to the other provisions of the
statute.

II. LEGISLATIVE INTENT MUST BE ASCERTAINED FROM THE STATUTE AS A

WHOLE

OPTIMA STATULI INTERPRETATIX EST IPSUM STATUTUM. The best interpreter of

the statute is the statute itself. Hence, in the construction of statutes, what is of
prevailing importance is to discover the legislative intent why the law is enacted. This
intent is primarily determined from the language of the statute.

D. Courts have the duty to reconcile or harmonize the different provisions of the
statute including the conflicting provisions thereof – Each provision in a statute is
inserted for a definite reason. The one who drafted the law may have a good reason for
inserting provision, which the reader may not see or appreciate. The courts therefore
have the duty to reconcile or harmonize so far as practicable the various parts and
provisions of a statute, including the conflicting provisions thereof, so as to make them
consistent, harmonious and sensible. It is only through this that statute will be given
effect as a whole.

E. As a Rule, the Statute of later date prevails – The statute of a later date is
presumed to be the latest expression of legislative will on the subject. Section 44© of
the Judiciary Act of 1948 should give way to the provisions of the Tariff Customs Code
and to RA No. 1937 which took effect on July 1, 1957 much later than the Judiciary Act
of 1948.

F. Generalia Specialibus Non Derogant – Special provisions prevail over the general;
however, if it is possible to harmonize the general and special provisions, said rule shall
not apply. Special provisions prevail regardless of the position it occupies in the statute,
and whether it comes earlier of later than the general one.

G. Special law prevails over a General Law

EXCEPTIONS: (1) The general law prevails over the special law when it treats the
subject in particular and the special law refers to it in general.

(2) The general law prevails over the special law when the legislature intended the
general enactment to cover the whole subject and to repeal all prior law inconsistent
therewith
H. Pari Materia Rule – all statutes relating to the same subject or having the same
general purpose, should be read and construed together as if they constituted one law.
They shall then be construed and harmonized with the existing law.

This rule is founded on the assumption that in enacting a law, the legislature has in
mind the previous statutes relating to the same subject matter, and in the absence of
any express repeal or amendment the new statute is deemed enacted in accordance
with the legislative policy embodied in the previous statutes that it enacted.

THE RULE HAS TWO QUALIFICATIONS

1. If two or more statutes on the same subject were enacted at different times and under
different conditions and circumstances, THEIR INTERPRETATION SHOULD BE IN
ACCORDANCE WITH THE CIRCUMSTANCES OR CONDITIONS PECULIAR TO
EACH. (Based on the Latin Maxim DISTINGUE TEMPRA ET CONCORDABIS JURA)

2. A statute will not be construed as repealing prior act or acts on the same subject
unless the new law is evidently intended to all prior laws on the matter.

In case of doubt, the doubt will be resolved against implied amendment or repeal and in
favor of harmonization of all laws on the subject.

I. In Interpreting Reenacted Statutes, the Court will follow the Construction which
such statute received when previously in force – A reenacted statute is a statute,
which reenacts a previous statute. In reenacting the provisions of a statute, it is
presumed that the legislature has the intention of adopting the construction and the
language of the previous act.

J. In the case of Adopted Statute, the interpretation of the courts of the state from
which it is adopted should be considered - Adopted Statute are those which are
patterned after, or copied from the statute of another country. For purposes of
construing an adopted statute, our courts will necessarily be guided by the interpretation
and construction of the courts of the country from which such statute is taken

K. In case of conflict between a common law principle and statutory provision,

the latter prevails – The Supreme Court ruled that equity applies only in the absence
of and never against statutory law or judicial rules of procedure.

Equity is justice outside legality. It applies only in the absence of and never against
statutory law or judicial rules of procedure.

L. Implied Repeals are not legally presumed in the absence of a clear and
unmistakable showing of such intentions -
M. Spirit and Purpose of the Law – Courts have the power to declare that a case
which falls within the letter of a statute is not governed by the statute, because it is not
within the spirit and reason of the law and the plain intention of the legislature.

N. Between two statutory interpretations, that which better serves the purpose of
the law should prevail.

O. When the reason of the law ceases, the law itself ceases.

P. Casus Omissus – When a statute makes specific provisions in regard to several

enumerated cases or objects, but omits to make any provision for a case or object
which is analogous to those enumerated, or which stands upon the same reason, and is
therefore within the general scope of the statute, and it appears that such case or object
was omitted by inadvertence or because it was overlooked or unforeseen.

The rule of “casus omissus pro omisso habendus est” can operate and apply only if and
when the omission has been clearly established.

Q. Stare Decisis – When the court has once laid down a principle of law as applicable
to a certain state of facts, it will adhere to that principle, and apply it to all future cases,
where facts are substantially the same, regardless of whether the parties and property
are the same.

IV. Rules of Construction of Specific Statutes

1. Penal Statutes – interpreted against the state and liberally construed in favor of the
accused.

- It must not be unreasonably applied as to defeat the true intent and meaning
of the enactment found in the language actually used.

- Language of the statute cannot be enlarged beyond the ordinary meaning of

its terms.

- applied prospectively. Felonies and misdemeanors are punished under the

laws in force at the time of their commission. EXCEPTION – It can be given
retroactive effect if it is favorable to the accused who is not a habitual
criminal.

2. Remedial Statutes – designed to correct an existing law, redress an existing

grievance, or introduce regulations conducive to the public good.

- Liberally construed because they were enacted by the legislature precisely to

improve the law and so that they will be in harmony with new ideas and conceptions of
justice and proper conduct of men.
3. Substantive Statutes – laws which establish rights and duties. If these rights and
duties were stated in clear and categorical language, there is no more room for
construction or interpretation. There is only room for application.

4. Labor Statutes – laws that govern the rights and obligations of employers and
employees, providing as well for the rules by which such rights and obligations may be
enforced. All doubts and interpretation of the provisions shall be in favor of Labor.

5. Tax Statutes – impose rules and regulations, related to taxation or to creation of

particular sources of revenue. To be construed most strongly against the government
and in favor of the subjects or citizens, because burdens are to not to be imposed, nor
presumed to be imposed beyond what statutes expressly and clearly import.

They are construed strictly against the taxing power and liberally in favor of the
taxpayer. Tax exemptions are construed strictly against tax payers and in favor of the
taxing power. Exemptions cannot be claimed unless they are expressly provided for in
the law.

6. Mandatory Statutes – contains words of command or of prohibition and non-

compliance with the same renders the proceedings to which it relates illegal and void.

7. Directory Statutes – permissible or discretionary in nature and merely outline the act
to be done in such a way that no injury can result from ignoring it or that its purpose can
be accomplished in a manner other than that prescribed and substantially the same
result obtained.

8. Permanent Statutes – statute whose operation is not limited to a particular period of

time but which continues in force until it is duly altered or repealed.

9. Temporary Statutes – statute whose life or duration is fixed for a specified period of
time but which continues in force, unless sooner repealed, until it is duly altered or
repealed.

10. General Statutes – statutes which relates to persons, entities, or things as a class
or operates equally or alike upon all of a class, omitting no persons, entity or thing
belonging to a class.

V. CONSTRUCTION AND INTERPRETATION OF WORDS AND PHRASES

A. When the Law Does not Distinguish, Courts should not Distinguish – The rule
founded on logic, is a corollary of the principle that general words and phrases of a
statute should ordinarily be accorded their natural and general significance.
B. If the law makes no distinction, neither should the Court.

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

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

E. Express Mention and Implied Exclusion – Expressio Unius est Exclusio Alterius

F. Where a particular word is equally susceptible of various meanings, its correct

construction may be made specific by considering the company of terms in which it is
found or with which it is associated.

G. Use of Negative Words – Negative words and phrases regarded as mandatory

while those in the affirmative are mere directory.

H. Use of “may” in the statute generally connotes a permissible thing while the word
“shall” is imperative.

I. The use of the word “may” clearly shows it is directory in nature and not mandatory.

J. The word “must” in a statute like “shall” is not always imperative and may be
consistent with an exercise of discretion.

K. “And” means conjunction connecting words and phrases expressing the idea that the
latter is to be added or taken along with the first.

L. The word “only” means exclusive.

M. A “week” means a period of seven consecutive days without regard to the day of the
week on which it begins.

N. Proviso is a clause or part of a clause in the statute, the office of which is either to
except something from the enacting clause, or to qualify or restrain its generality, or to
exclude some possible ground of misinterpretation of its extent. (“Provided” is the word
used in introducing a proviso.)
VI. LATIN MAXIMS AND THEIR IMPORTANCE – used not only in interpreting statute.
They are also used by judges and justices in their decisions to add elegance to their
language and to give emphasis to the legal points

A. Principle: Laws Should be Prospective Not Retroactive – all statutes are to be

construed as having only a prospective operation unless the purpose and intention of
the legislature to give them retrospective effect is expressly declared or is necessarily
implied from the language. In case of doubt, the doubt must be resolved against
retrospective effect.

Lex Prospicit, Non Respicit – the law looks forward, not backward.
Lex de Futuro, Judex de Paterio – The law provides for the future, the judges for the
past.

B. Principle: When the Law is Clear, What the Courts should do is to apply it, not
to interpret it – Applied in a long line of cases that have been decided by the Supreme
Court.

“Construction and interpretation come only after it has been demonstrated that
application is impossible or inadequate with them. It is not within the power of a court to
set aside the clear and explicit mandate of a statutory provision”

Absolute Sentencia Expositore Non Indiget – When the language of the law is clear, no
explanation of it is required.

Optima Statuti Interpretatix Est Insum Statutum – The best interpreter of the statute is
the statute itself.

C. Principle: It is not the Letter of the Law that Killeth, it is the Spirit of the Law
that Giveth Life – From time to time, this question has been asked? What if the letter of
the law conflicts with its spirit, which prevails?

Ratio Legis Est Anima – The reason of the law is its soul.
Ratio Legis – Interpretation according to its spirit.
Cessante Ratione Cesat Ipsa Lex – When the reason for the law ceases, the law
ceases also to exist.

TWO SCHOOLS OF THOUGHTS

JUSTICE ISAGANI CRUZ – A too literal reading of the law is apt to constrict rather than
fulfill its purpose and defeat the intention of its authors. Usually found not in the “letter
that killeth but in the spirit that give life” which is not really that evanescent or elusive.
Judges must look beyond and not be bound by the language of the law, seeking to
discover by their own lights the reason and the rhyme for its enactment.

Article 10 of the New Civil Code “In case of doubt in the interpretation or application of
the laws, it is presumed that the lawmaking body intended right and justice to prevail”.

CHIEF JUSTICE RAMON AQUINO – risky to rely on the “so called spirit of the law”
which he says that we cannot see nor handle and about which we do not know very
much.

“If the language of the law is clear and unequivocal, then read the law to mean exactly
what it says. If not, look for the intention of the legislature.

D. Principle: What is Not Included in those enumerated are deemed excluded –

used and applied in a litany of cases. The enumeration of specified matters in a statute
is construed, as an exclusion of matters not enumerated unless a different intention
appears.

Expresio Unius est Exclusio Alterius – Express mention is implied exclusion.

- Ancilliary rule of statutory construction.
- Not of universal application. Neither it is conclusive. It should be applied only
as a means of discovering legislative intent which is not otherwise manifest
and should not be permitted to defeat the plainly indicated purpose of the
legislature.

E. Principle: Special Provisions Prevail Over General Provisions

Generalia specialibus non derogant – A general law does not nullify a specific or special
law

F. Principle: While the Law May be Hard, It is the Law that Will Be Followed – When
the law is clearly worded, there is no room for interpretation. It is the sworn duty of the
judge to apply the law without fear or favor. It is not for the courts to decide that the law
is unwise. The duty of the courts is apply the law, whether it is wise or unwise.

G. Principle: Without Intent, there can be no crime – still applicable. The first element
of a felony must be that the act or omission is voluntary. If the alleged criminal act is
committed by an insane person, he is not criminally liable but he may be civilly liable.
Cogitationis Poenam Nemo Emeret – No man maybe punished for his thoughts.
Actus Non Facit Reum Nisi Mens Sit Rea – The act itself does not make a man guilty
unless his intention were so.
Actus Me Invito Factus Non Est Meus Actus – An act done by me against my will is not
my act.

H. Principle: Ignorance of the Law Excuses No one but Ignorance of Fact may be
an Excuse

Ignorantia Legis Neminem Excusat – Ignorance of the law excuses no one

Ignorantia Facto Excusat – Ignorance or mistake in point of fact is an excuse.

Article 3 applies to all kinds of domestic laws, whether civil or penal and whether
substantive or remedial.

I. Principle: When the Law does not distinguish, we should not distinguish –

Ubi Lex Non-Distinguit Nec Nos Distiguere Debemos – Where the law does not
distinguish, we should not distinguish

Latin Maxims and Phrases Related to the Subject of Statutory Construction

A. Mens Legislatores – The courts should give the statute a reasonable or liberal
construction which will best effect its purpose rather than one which will defeat it.

B. Reddendo Singula Singulis - referring each to each.

Each word or phrase or clause must be referred to their proper connection in order to
give it proper force and effect, rendering none of them useless or superfluous.

Cassus Omissus Pro Omisso Habbendus Est – a case omitted is to be held as

intentionally omitted. The court cannot insert in a statute that which has been omitted.
The court can only do so if it is necessary to obviate repugnancy or inconsistency, or
where the omission was made through clerical error, accident or inadvertence, or where
it is necessary to complete the sense of the statute.

Noscitur A Sociis – Where a particular word or phrase in a statute is ambiguous in itself

or is equally susceptible of various meanings, its true meaning maybe made clear and
specific by considering the company in which it is found or with which it is associated.

Ejusdem Generis – When general words follow the designation of particular things, or
classes of persons or subjects, the general words will usually be construed to include
only those persons or things of the same class or general nature as those specifically
enumerated.