Bukidnon State University College of Law
Bukidnon State University College of Law
College of Law
Statutory Construction
Atty. Gerardo C. Murillo
If a statute is clear, plain and free from ambiguity, it must be given its
literal meaning and applied without attempted interpretation. When the
language of the law is clear, no explanation of it is required. It is presumed
that the words employed by the legislature in a statute correctly express its
intent or will. Where a statute defines a word or phrase employed therein, the
word or phrase should not, by construction, be given a different meaning. When
the legislature defines a word used in a statute, it does not usurp the courts
function to interpret the laws but it merely legislates what should form part of the
law itself. Thus, what is not clearly provided in the law cannot be extended
to those matters outside its scope.
B. Explain the relationship of the principle which states that “The law may be harsh,
but it is the law” (dura lex sed lex) with the plain-meaning rule.
C. Explain the phrase “interpretation of the spirit or reason of the law” (ratio legis).
What is the limitation of this rule?
The spirit or intention of a statute prevails over the letter of it. A statute
must be capable of construction or interpretation. The court must use every
authorized means to ascertain the intent of the statute and give it an
intelligible meaning. The court may even depart from the language of a
statute if to do so will enable to effectuate legislative intent and purpose. If
a language is capable of more than one meaning is to be taken in such
sense as to harmonize with the intention and object and effectuate the
purpose of the enactment.
Applies only when there is ambiguity in the language employed in the law.
Where the law is clear and free from ambiguity, the letter of the law is not
disregarded on the pretext of pursuing its spirit.
D. Discuss the principle that when the reason of the law ceases, law itself ceases.
The reason which induced the legislature to enact a law is the heart of the
law. Hence, the reason of the law is its soul.
Where a statute totally fails to express a meaning, a becoming sense of
judicial modesty forbids the court from assuming and, consequently, from
supplying a meaning to it. Hence, the statute is necessarily inoperative.
II.
A. State and explain exhaustively by giving examples of the rule in the interpreting
the meaning and scope of the different terms used in law.
Ordinary meaning
The general rule is that words should be given their plain, ordinary,
and common usage meaning.
Natural, ordinary, commonly accepted and most obvious signification
Statutory definition
Statutes sometimes define particular words and phrases In this case,
the legislative definition controls the meaning of the word, irrespective
of the ordinary or common meaning But it is not a usurpation of the
court’s function to interpret the laws, since it merely legislates what
should form part of the law itself.
General words
Words of general significance in a statute is to be taken in its
ordinary and comprehensive sense.
A general word should not be given a restricted meaning where no
restriction is indicated.
If a word in a statute has both restricted and general meaning, the
general must prevail over the restricted unless the nature of the
subject matter or the context in which it is employed clearly indicates
that the limited sense is intended.
Identical terms
The general rule is words or phrases repeatedly used in a statute will
bear the same and consistent meaning throughout the whole statute.
Dictated by context
The context dictates how words should be construed.
Broad sense to a word of ordinarily limited meaning (e.g.
riparian refers not only those living near the river but have a
water frontage)
Limited meaning of a word of broad signification (e.g. overthrow
in the AntiSubversion Act is limited to those by force or
violence)
Generic in one part, limited in another (e.g. owner may be real
or the manager)
Disjunctive and conjunctive words
Disjunctive words signify disassociation and independence of one
thing from each other enumerated (e.g. “or”).
Conjunctive words means “together with,” “joined with,” “along or
together with,” “added to or linked to” used to conjoin word with word,
phrase with phrase, clause with clause.
B. Discuss the following principles and their applications:
a. Noscitur a sociis
Where a particular word or phrase is ambiguous in itself
or equally susceptible of various meanings, its correct
construction may be made clear and specific by
considering the company of words associated.
Where most of the word in an enumeration of words in a
statute are used in their generic and ordinary sense, the rest
of the words should similarly be construed.
To remove doubt refer to the meaning of associated or
companion word.
b. Ejusdem generis
While general words are accorded their generic sense, as a
rule, they will not be given such meaning if they are used in
association with specific words.
When a general word follows an enumeration of particular
and specific words of the same class, the general word is
to be restricted to persons, things or cases of the same
kind as those specifically mentioned.
Presumption : Had the legislature intended the general words to
be used in their generic and unrestricted sense, it would not
have enumerated
specific words since the minds of the legislators are addressed
to the particularization.
Requisites :
1. Enumeration of particular and specific words, followed by a
general word.
2. The specific words constitute a class or of the same kind.
3. Enumeration is not exhaustive or be an example.
4. No indication of legislative intent to give the general words
or phrases a broader meaning.
Limitations :
1. The specific words do not constitute a readily discernible
class and are patently not of the same kind.
2. There is the regulatory intent to give the general phrase a
broader meaning.
3. The most important is that the statutory provision is not itself
restrictive.
4. Where the law is clear and free from ambiguity.
Presumption :
The legislature would not have made specified enumerations in
the statute had the intention been not to restrict its meaning
and confine its terms to those expressly mentioned.
Variations :
1. What is expressed puts an end to that which is implied (i.e.
if the statute is expressly limited, it may not be extended to
other matters)
2. A thing that is not excepted must be regarded as coming
within the purview of the general rule (exceptio firmat regulam in
casibus no exeptis)
Limitations :
1. Not applicable where words are used by example only or to
remove doubts
2. When the enumeration was not intended to be exclusive
3. If there is no reason why other persons or things not so
enumerated should not have been included and manifest
injustice will follow by non-inclusion (violation of equal protection
clause)
4. When it defeats the plainly indicated purpose of the
legislature
5. If it leads to inconvenience, hardship and injury to public
service
III.
A. Discuss the concept that a statute should be construed as a whole.
Importance in construction
The intent of the statute is ascertained from it taken as a whole. And this
purpose (intent) controls its construction- how each word and phrases may
be given meaning.
Presumption :
The legislature has enacted a statute whose provisions are in harmony and
consistent with each other and that conflicting interpretation in the same
statute are never supposed or regarded.
Exception :
If one part of a statute cannot be reconciled or harmonized with another
without nullifying one in favour of another, the court should construe it by
choosing the one which will best effectuate the legislative intent.
How done :
1. Take the thought conveyed by the statute as a whole
2. Construe the constituent parts together
3. Ascertain the legislative intent from the whole act
4. Consider each and every provision in the light of its general
purpose
5. Endeavor to make every part effective, harmonious and sensible
A statute should not be construed in such a way that will give rise to a
constitutional doubt.
If a statute is reasonably susceptible of two constructions, one
constitutional and one unconstitutional, that construction in favour of its
constitutionality shall be avoided and the construction that will render
it invalid rejected.
Every intendment of the law should lean towards its validity, and the
court should favour that construction which gives it the greater
chance of surviving the test of constitutionality.
Courts may be even justified in disregarding the more usual and
apparent import of the language used in the statute and in straining
the ordinary meaning of words to avert any collusion or repugnancy
between what the statute provides and what the Constitution requires.
B. What is the doctrine of in pari materia and how are statutes in pari materia
construed?
Presumption:
Laws are consistent with each other. Whenever a legislature enacts a law,
it 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 accord with the legislative policy embodied in those prior
statutes.
Maxim : interpretare et concordare leges legibus est optimus interpretandi
modus (every statute must be so construed and harmonized with other
statutes as to form a uniform system of jurisprudence)
General rule :
A statute will not be construed as repealing a prior act on the same
subject. In case of doubt, it will be resolved against implied amendment or
repeal and in favour of harmonization of all laws on the subject matter.
Exceptions :
1. Unless there is an irreconcilable repugnancy between them and
harmonization or reconciliation is not possible
2. The new law evidently intended to supersede all prior acts on the matter
to comprise itself the sole and complete system of legislation on the subject
If harmonization is impossible:
If there has been an implied repeal, the latter statute should be
construed as to modify the prior law no further than may be
necessary to effect the specific purpose of the latter enactment.
If cannot be possibly harmonized, the earlier one must yield to the
later one, it being the latest expression of legislative will.
IV.
A. Enumerate the statutes that are to be strictly construed and explain the reason
for the said construction.
1. Penal statutes
2. Statutes in derogation of rights a. Statutes authorizing
expropriations b. Statutes imposing taxes and custom duties c.
Statutory grounds for removing officials
3. Statutes granting privileges
a. Legislative grants to local government units
b. Naturalization laws
c. Statutes granting tax exemptions
d. Statutes prescribing formalities of will 4. Statutes concerning
the sovereign a. Statutes authorizing suits against the
government
5. Exceptions and provisos
1. Penal statutes
Those which define crimes, treat of their nature, and provide for
their punishment
Strictly construed against the State and liberally in favour of the
accused
Reason:
a. The law is tender in favour of rights of an individual; the
object is to establish a certain rule by conformity to which
mankind would be safe, and the discretion of the court limited.
b. It is not to enable a guilty person to escape punishment
through a technicality but to provide a precise definition of
forbidden acts.
General rule :
Penal statute shall not be construed to make the commission
of certain prohibited acts criminal without regard to the intent of
the doer
Maxim : actus non facit reum nisi mens sit rea (the act itself
does not make a man guilty unless his intention were so)
actus me invite factus non est meus actus (an act done by
me against my will is not my act)
B. Enumerate the statutes that are to be liberally construed and explain the reason
for the said construction.
5. Election laws
Reasonable and liberally construed to achieve the purpose-
to safeguard the will of the electorate in choosing their
representatives
It has three parts:
1. Provisions for the conduct of elections which election
officials are required to follow are mandatory before the
elections and directory after elections. These are liberally
construed so as not to vitiate the election.
2. Provisions which candidates for office are required to
comply are mandatory and failure to comply is fatal.
3. Provisions designed to determine the will of the electorate
are liberally construed, technical and procedural barriers
should not be allowed to stand if they constitute an
obstacle in the choice of elective officials.
6. Amnesty proclamations
Liberally construed in favour of the persons within the amnesty
grant to encourage the return to the fold of law those who have
veered away from it. The same goes with pardon since the two are
synonymous
8. Adoption statute
Liberally construed in favour of the child adopted. This is in
consonance in the concept that adoption statutes, being humane
and salutary, hold the interest and welfare of the child to be of
paramount consideration.
V.
Mandatory statutes
Positive- Commands that something be done, or performed in a
particular way.
Negative- Prohibition; that something be not done, leaving the
person concerned no choice on the matter except to obey
- acts executed against the provisions of mandatory or prohibitory
laws shall be void.
Directory statutes
1. Permissive or discretionary in nature and merely outlines 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 will have substantially the same result.
2. Statute which merely operates to confer discretion upon a person,
namely, to act according to the dictates of his own judgment and
conscience, and not controlled by the judgment and conscience of
others.
Test is to ascertain the consequences that will follow in case what the
statute requires is not done or what it forbids is performed.
i. Language used
General rules :
1. Statutes using words of commands (shall, must, ought, should) or
prohibition (cannot, shall not, ought not) connotes compulsion and are
regarded as mandatory and imperative.
2. Negative words or those in form of an affirmative proposition
qualified by the word “only” have the force of exclusionary negation.
3. This indicates the legislative intent to make the statute mandatory
and can rarely be directory.
4. Statutes using permissive words (may) or words importing
permissiveness are generally directory.
5. “May” as an auxiliary verb shows opportunity or possibility, it
implies a possible existence of something.
Directory if...
a. No substantial rights depend on it.
b. No injury can result from ignoring it.
c. The purpose of the legislature can be accomplished in a
manner other than that prescribed and substantially the same
results obtained.
d. Where the directions of the statute are given merely with a
view to the proper, orderly, and prompt conduct of business.
e. Compliance with the statute is a matter of convenience
rather than substance.
Mandatory if...
a. The doing of an act is required by justice or public duty.
b. It vests a public body or officer with power and authority to
take such action which concerns the public interests or rights
of individuals.
c. If it will cause hardship or injustice on the part of the public.
d. If it will lead to absurd, impossible or mischievous
consequences.
e. Non-compliance with what is required will result in the
nullity of the act.
1. Conferring power
2. Granting benefits
3. Prescribing jurisdictional requirements
a. Prescribing time to take action or to appeal
b. Prescribing procedural requirements
4. Election laws on conduct of election
5. Election laws on qualifications and disqualifications
6. Prescribing qualifications for office
7. Assessment of taxes
8. Public auction sale
VI.
Prospective statutes:
1. Penal statutes
2. Ex post facto
3. Bill of attainder
4. Statutes substantive in nature
5. Statutes affecting vested rights
6. Statutes affecting obligations of contract
7. Repealing and amendatory acts
Art. 4 of the Civil Code which provides that “Laws shall have no
retroactive effect, unless the contrary is provided.”
Lex prospicit, non respicit – the law looks forward, not backward
Lex de future, judex de praeterito – the law provides for the future, the
judge for the past.
The general rule is that, statutes cannot be given retroactive effect. However, the
following statutes can be given retroactive affect:
1. Procedural statutes
2. Curative statutes
3. Police power legislations
4. Statutes relating to prescription
5. Statutes relating to appeals