Statutory Construction Notes

STATUTORY CONSTRUCTION NOTES
CALTEX vs. PALOMAR
Construction defined
- Construction is the art or process of discovering and expounding the meaning

'and intention of n the authors of the law with respect to its applica-tion to a
give case, where that intention is rendered doubtful, amongst others, by
reason of the fact that the given case is not explicitly provided for in the law
No room for Declatory Relief
- simply applied the clear provisions of the law to a given set of facts as
embodied in the rules of the contest"
Principle of legal hermeneutics noscitur a sociis
- term be accorded no other meaning then that which is consistent with the
nature of the word associatedtherewith
AISPORNA vs CA
Legislative intent
- must be ascertained from a consideration of the statute as a whole. The

particular words,clauses and phrases should not be studied as detached
and isolated expressions, but the whole and every part of the statute
must be considered in fixing the meaning of any of its parts and in order
to produce harmonious whole.
UNSERSTANDING STATUTE
-must be so construed as to harmonize and give effect to all its provisions

whenever possible. The meaning of the law, it must be borne in mind, is
not to be extracted from any single part portion or section or from
isolated words and phrases, clauses or sentences but from a general
consideration or view of the act as a whole.
PCFI vs NTC
- The resolution, which is not unanimous, does not subscribe to the view
that the NTC should or must promulgate rules and regulations because, it
is said, the decree must be given its ordinary meaning; the word used is
the permissive “may” and not the mandatory “shall.”
relied on the canons:
Index animi sermo est
- (speech is the indication of intent)
Verba legis non est recedendum
(from the words of the statute there should be no departure)
Opposite to these canons:
Verba intentioni, non e contra, debent inservire
- (words oughtto be more subservient to the intent and not the intent to
the words)
- The literal interpretation of the words of an act should not prevail if it

creates a result contrary to the apparent intention of the legislature and if
the words are sufficiently flexible to admit of a construction which will
effectuate the legislative intention.
- The intention prevails over the letter, and the letter must if possible be
read so as to conform to the spirit of the act. ‘While the intention of the
legislature must be ascertained from the words used to express it, the
manifest reason and obvious purpose of the law should not be sacrificed
to a literal interpretation of such words.’ Thus words or clauses may be
enlarged or restricted to harmonize with other provisions of an act.
PAAT vs CA
- In the construction of statutes, it must be read in such a way as to give
effect to the purpose projected in the statute. Statutes should be
construed in the light of the object to be achieved and the evil or mischief
to be suppressed, and they should be given such construction as will
advance the object, suppress the mischief, and secure the benefits
intended.
- When the statute is clear and explicit, there is hardly room for any
extended court ratiocination or rationalization of the law.
- This is clear from the language of Executive Order No. 277 when it
eliminated the phrase “shall be guilty of qualified theft as defined and
punished under Articles 309 and 310 of the Revised Penal Code” and
inserted the words “shall be punished with the penalties imposed under
Article 309 and 310 of the Revised Penal Code.” When the statute is clear
and explicit, there is hardly room for any extended court ratiocination or
rationalization of the law.
PEOPLE vs MAPA
FUNDAMENTAL DUTY OF COURTS
- to apply the law. "Construction and interpretation come only after it has
been demonstrated that application is impossible or inadequate without
them." It is not within the power of a court to set aside the clear and
explicit mandate of a statutory provision.
LEVERIZA vs IAC
STATUTORY CONSTRUCTION
- When the words and language of documents is clear and plain or readily
understandable by an ordinary reader thereof, there is absolutely no room
for interpretation or construction anymore
DAOANG vs MUNICIPAL JUDGE
STATURORY CONSTRUCTION
- Rule that a statute clear and unambiguous on its face need not be
interpreted.— Well known is the rule of statutory construction to the
effect that a statute clear and unambiguous on its face need not be
interpreted; stated otherwise, the rule is that only statutes with an
ambiguous or doubtful meaning may be the subject of statutory
construction
PARAS vs COMELEC
STARTUTORY CONSTRUCTION
- It is a rule in statutory construction that every part of the statute must be
interpreted with reference to the context, i.e., that every part of the
statute must be considered together with the other parts, and kept
subservient to the general intent of the whole enactment.
- In the interpretation of a statute, the Court should start with the
assumption that the legislature intended to enact an effective law, and
the legislature is not presumed to have done a vain thing in the
enactment of a statute.
- An interpretation should, if possible, be avoided under which a statute or
provision being construed is defeated, or as otherwise expressed,
nullified, destroyed, emasculated, repealed, explained away, or rendered
insignificant, meaningless, inoperative or nugatory
- Statutory construction that a statute should be interpreted in harmony
with the Constitution
-“We admonish against a too-literal reading of the law as this is apt to
constrict rather than fulfill its purpose and defeat the intention of its
authors. That intention is usually found not in ‘the letter that killeth but in
the spirit that vivifieth’ x x x.” The spirit, rather than the letter of a law
determines its construction; hence, a statute, as in this case, must be
read according to its spirit and intent.
ENDENCIA vs DAVID
SEPARATION OF POWER
- Under our system of constitutional government, the Legislative
department is assigned the power to make and enact laws. The Executive
department is charged with the execution or carrying out of the provisions
of said laws. But the interpretation and application of said laws belong
exclusively to the Judicial department. And this au thority to interpret and
apply the laws extends to the Con stitution. Before the courts can
determine whether a law is constitutional or not, it will have to interpret
and ascertain the meaning not only of said law, but also of the pertinent
portion of the Constitution in order to decide whether there is a conflict
between the two, because if there is, then the law will have to give way
and has to be declared invalid and unconstitutional.

Statutory Construction Notes

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

Statutory Construction Notes

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

STATUTORY CONSTRUCTION NOTES

CALTEX vs. PALOMAR

- Construction is the art or process of discovering and expounding the meaning

No room for Declatory Relief

Principle of legal hermeneutics noscitur a sociis

- must be ascertained from a consideration of the statute as a whole. The

-must be so construed as to harmonize and give effect to all its provisions

- The literal interpretation of the words of an act should not prevail if it

You might also like