B. Interpretation or Construction of Words and Phrases

IN GENERAL

A word or phrase used in the statue may have an ordinary, generic, restricted, technical, legal, commercial or trading meaning.

General rule in interpreting the meaning and scope of a term used in the law review of the WHOLE law involved as well as the INTENDMENT of law (not of an isolated part or a particular provision alone)

1. in the absence of legislative intent to the contrary, words and phrases should be given their plain, ordinary and common meaning

Mustang Lumber Inc., vs. CA

Statute: Sec. 68 of PD 705 penalizes the cutting, gathering and or collecting timber or other forest products without a license.

Issue: WON lumber included in timber

HELD: The Revised Forestry Code contains no definition of timber or lumber. Timber is included in definition of forestry products par. (q) Sec. 3. Lumber same definitions as processing plants. Processing plant is any mechanical set-up, machine or combination of machine used for processing of logs and other forest raw materials into lumber, veneer, plywood, etc.

Simply means, lumber is processed log or forest raw material. The Code uses lumber in ordinary common usage. In 1993 edition of Websters International Dictionary, lumber is defined as timber or logs after being prepared for the market. Therefore, lumber is processed log or timber. Sec. 68 of PD 705 makes no distinction between raw and processed timber.

Silverio vs. Republic

2. Statutory Definition

The legislative definition controls the meaning of a statutory word, irrespective of any other meaning the word or phrase may have in its ordinary or usual sense.

For the legislature, in adopting a specific definition is deemed to have restricted the meaning of the word within the terms of the definition.

When the legislature defines a word, it does not usurp the courts function to interpret the laws but merely legislates what should form part of the law itself.

While the definition of terms in a statute must be given all weight due to them in the construction of the provision in which they are used, the terms or phrases being part and parcel of the whole statute must be given effect in their entirety as harmonious, coordinated and integrated unit. Not as a mass of heterogeneous and unrelated if not incongruous terms, clauses and sentences.

Chang Yung fa vs. Giazon

ISSUE: whether alien who comes into country as temporary visitor is an immigrant

Held: While immigrant in ordinary definition, an alien who comes to the Philippines for permanent residence, the Immigration Act makes its own definition of term, which is any alien departing from any place outside the Philippines, destined for the Philippines, other than a non-immigrant, the definition emphasizes an immigrant, who is an alien, who comes to the Philippines either to reside temporarily or permanently.

People vs. Buenviaje

Issue: Whether a person who practiced chiropractic without having been duly licensed, may be criminally liable for violation of medical law

Held:Though the term practice of medicine, chiropractic may in ordinary sense fall within its meaning; statutorily defined includes manipulations employed in chiropractic; thus one who practices chiropractic without license is criminally liable.

3. In the absence of legislative intent to the contrary; general words are to be construed generally.

Exception: General terms may be restrained and limited by specific terms with which they are associated

4. Ejusdem Generis (or the same kind or species)

General Rule: Where a general word or phrase follows an enumeration of particular and specific words of the same class or where the latter follow the former, the general word or phrase is to be construed to include, or to be restricted to persons, things or cases akin to resembling, or of the same kind or class as those specifically mentioned.

Purpose: give effect to both particular or general words, by treating the particular words as indicating the class and the general words as indicating all that is embraced in said class, although not specifically named by the particular words.

Principle: based on proposition that had the legislature intended the general words to be used in their generic and unrestricted sense, it would have not enumerated the specific words.

Presumption: the legislators address specifically to the particularization

Limitations of Ejusdem Generis

Requisites:

a. Statute contains an enumeration of particular and specific words, followed by general word or phraseb. Particular and specific words constitute a class or are the same kindc. Enumeration of the particular and specific words is not exhaustive or is not merely by examplesd. There is no indication of legislative intent to give the general words or phrases a broader meaning

Rule of ejusdem generis, is not of universal application, it should use to carry out, not defeat the intent of the law.

Colgate Palmolive Phils., Inc. vs. Hon. JimenezGR No. L-14787, January 28, 1961

Statutory rule: General terms may be restricted by specific word, with the result that the general language will be limited by specific language which indicates the statutes 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.

Facts:Petitioner corporation engages in manufacturing toilet preparations and household remedies. They import materials including stabilizers and flavors is among those petitioner imports. For every importation, petitioner pays 17% special excise tax on the foreign exchange used for the payment of the cost, transportation and other charges pursuant to RA 601, the Exchange Tax Law. However the same law also provides that foreign exchanged used for xxx importation to the Philippines of xxx stabilizers and flavors xxx shall be refunded to any importer making application therefore. Petitioner now seeks a refund of the 17% special excise tax they paid in the total sum of P113,343.99.

Issue: W/N the foreign exchange used by petitioner in the importation of dental cream stabilizers and flavors is exempt from the 17% special excise tax imposed by the Exchange Tax Law so as to entitle it to a refund.

Held:Yes. The refusal to deny refund was based on the argument that all the items enumerated for the tax exemption fall under one specific class, namely: food products, book supplies/materials and medical supplies and that for petitioners to be exempt, the stabilizers and flavors they use must fall under the category of food products. Respondent contends that since petitioners use these as toothpaste, the same is not a food product. Court ruled that although stabilizers and flavors are preceded by items that might fall under food products, the following which were also included are hardly such: fertilizer, poultry feed, industrial starch and more. Therefore, the law must be seen in its entirety. The rule of construction that general and unlimited terms are restrained and limited by a particular recital does not require the rejection of general terms entirely. It is intended merely as an aid in ascertaining the intention of the legislature and is to be taken in connection with other rules of construction.

PP vs. Vicente Echavez, Jr. et al.GR Nos. L-47757-61, January 28, 1990

Statutory rule: Rule of ejusdem generis is merely a tool of statutory construction resorted to when legislative intent is uncertain.

Facts:16 persons were charged with squatting which is penalized by Presidential Decree No. 772 which provides that any person who with the use of force, xxx succeeds in occupying or possessing the property of another against his will for residential, commercial or any other purposes, shall be punished by imprisonment xxx The lower court denied the motion and ruled that agricultural land is not part of PD 772 on the basis of ejusdem generis (of the same kind or species) since its preamble does not mention the Secretary of Agriculture.

Issue: W/N PD 772 applies to agricultural lands

Held: No. PD 772 does not apply to pasture lands because its preamble shows that it was intended to apply to squatting in urban communities or more particularly to illegal constructions in squatter areas made by well-to-do individuals. But the Supreme Court disagreed with the lower courts usage of the maxim Ejusdem Generis because the intent of the decree is unmistakable. It stated that the rule of ejusdem generis is merely a tool for statutory construction which is resorted to when the legislative intent is uncertain.

RP vs. Eutropio Migrinio and Troadio TecsonGR No. 89483, August 30, 1990

Statutory rule: Applying the rule in statutory construction known as ejusdem generis, that is where general words follow an enumeration of persons or things, such general words are not to be construed in their widest extent, but are to be held as applying only to persons or things of the same kind or class as those especially mentioned.

Facts:Acting on information received which indicated the acquisition of wealth beyond his lawful income, the Philippine Anti-Graft Board required private respondent Lt. Col. Tecson to submit his explanation or comment, together with supporting evidence thereto. Private respondent was unable to provide supporting evidence because they were allegedly in the custody of his bookkeeper who has gone abroad. The anti-graft Board was created by the PCGG to "investigate the unexplained wealth and corrupt practices of AFP personnel, both retired and in active service." Private respondent mainly argues that he is not one of the subordinates contemplated in Executive Orders No. 1, 2, 14 and 14-A are acts of his alone and not connected with being a crony, business associate or subordinate. Hence, the PCGG has no jurisdiction to investigate him.

Issue: W/N private respondent may be investigated and prosecuted by the Board, an agency of the PCGG, for violation of RA 3019 and 1379.

Held:No. Applying the rule in statutory construction, the term "subordinate" as used in EO 1 and 2 would refer to one who enjoys close association or relation with former President Marcos and/or his wife, similar to the immediate family member, relative and close associate in E) 1 and the close relative, business associate, dummy, agent or nominee in EO 2.

Note: Ejusdem Generis General words followed by an enumeration of persons or things by words of a particular and specific meaning, such general words are not to be construed in their widest extent, but are to be held as applying only to persons or things of the same kind or class as those specifically mentioned.

Liwag vs. happy Glen Loop Homeowners Association

HELD: Lot 11, Block 5 of Happy Glen Loop Subdivision forms part of its open spaceThe term open space is defined in P.D. 1216 as an area reserved exclusively for parks, playgrounds, recreational uses, schools, roads, places of worship, hospitals, health centers,barangaycenters and other similar facilities and amenities.[33]The decree makes no specific mention of areas reserved for water facilities. Therefore, we resort to statutory construction to determine whether these areas fall under other similar facilities and amenities.The basic statutory construction principle ofejusdem generisstates that where a general word or phrase follows an enumeration of particular and specific words of the same class, the general word or phrase is to be construed to include or to be restricted to things akin to or resembling, or of the same kind or class as, those specifically mentioned.[34]Applying this principle to the afore-quoted Section 1 of P.D. 1216, we find that the enumeration refers to areas reserved for the common welfare of the community. Thus, the phrase other similar facilities and amenities should be interpreted in like manner.Here, the water facility was undoubtedly established for the benefit of the community. Water is a basic need in human settlements,[35]without which the community would not survive. We therefore rule that, based on the principle ofejusdem generisand taking into consideration the intention of the law to create and maintain a healthy environment in human settlements,[36]the location of the water facility in the Subdivision must form part of the area reserved for open space.

5. Words with commercial or trade definitions Words or phrase common among merchants and traders, acquire commercial meanings.

When any of the words used in the statute, it should be given such trade or commercial meaning as has been generally understood among merchants.

Used in the following tariff laws, laws of commerce, laws of government of the importer

The law to be applicable to his class, should be construed as universally understood by imported or trader.

6. Words with legal or technical definitions

General Rule: words that have or have been used in a technical sense or those that have been judicially construed to have a certain meaning should be interpreted according to the sense in which they have been previously used, although the sense may vary from the strict or literal meaning of the words.

Presumption: language used in a statute, which has a technical or well-known meaning is used in that sense by the legislature.

Malanyaon vs. Lising

Sec. 13 of Anti-Graft law

Statute: if a public officer is acquitted, he shall be entitled to reinstatement and to his salaries and benefits which he failed to receive during the suspension

Issue: Will a public officer whose case has been dismissed not acquitted is entitled to benefits of Section 13?

Held: No. Acquittal (legal meaning) finding of not guilty based on the merit, Dismissal does not amount to acquittal except when the dismissal comes after the prosecution has presented all its evidence and is based on insufficiency of such evidence.

Manila Herald Publishing Co., Inc. vs. Ramos

Section 14 of rule 59 of Rules of Court which prescribes the steps to be taken when property attached is claimed by a person other than the defendant or his agent

Statute: proper action limits the 3rd partys remedy to intervene in the action in which the writ of attachment is issuedHeld: action has acquired a well-defined meaning as an ordinary suit in a court of justice by which one party prosecutes another for the enforcement or protection of a right or prevents redress or wrong

While

Section 2, Rule 2 of the Rules of Court, Commencement of Action

Statute: Civil action may be commenced by filling a complaint with the proper courtWord: commencement indicates the origination of entire proceeding

It was appropriate to use proper action )in 1st statute) than intervention, since asserted right of 3rd party claimant necessarily flows out of pending suit; if the word intervention is used, it becomes strange.

7. How Identical terms in the statute construedGeneral Rule: a word or phrase repeatedly used in a statute will bear the same meaning throughout the statute; unless a different intention is clearly expressed.

Rationale: word used in a statue in a given sense presumed to be used in same sense throughout the law

Dela Paz vs. Court of Agrarian Relations

(Riceland) share tenancy 0 average produce per hectare for the 3 agricultural years next preceding the current harvest leasehold according to normal average harvest of the 3 preceding years Year agricultural not calendar year Agricultural Year represents 1 cropping; if in calendar year, 2 cropping are raised thats 2 agricultural years.

8. Ubi lex non distinguit nec nos distinguere debemus where the law does not distinguish, courts should not distinguish

Corollary principle: General words or phrases in a statute should ordinarily be accorded their natural and general significance

Corollary principle: Where the law does not make any exception, courts may not except something there from, unless there is a compelling reason to justify it.

Application: when legislature laid down a rule for one class, no difference to other class.

Presumption: that the legislature made no qualification in the general use of a term

Juanito Pilar vs. Commission on ElectionsGR No. 115245, July 11, 1995

Statutory rule: The rule is well recognized that where the law does not distinguish, courts should not distinguish.

Facts:On March 22, 1992, petitioner filed his certificate of candidacy for the position of member of the Sangguniang Panlalawigan of the Province of Isabela. Three days later, he withdrew his certificate of candidacy. As a result, respondent Commission imposed a fine of P10,000.00 for failure to file his statement of contributions and expenditures. Petitioner contends that it is clear from the law that the candidate must have entered the political contest, and should have either won or lost.

Issue: W/N petitioner can be held liable for failure to file a statement of contributions and expenditures since he was a "non-candidate", having withdrawn his certificate of candidacy three days after its filing.

Held:Yes. Sec. 14 of Ra 7166 states that "every candidate" has the obligation to file his statement of contributions and expenditures. As the law makes no distinction or qualification as to whether the candidate pursued his candidacy or withdrew the same, the term "every candidate" must be deemed to refer not only to a candidate who pursued his campaign, but also to who withdrew his candidacy. Sec. 13 of Resolution No. 2348 categorically refers to "all candidates who filed their certificate of candidacy".

People vs. Judge Antonio Evangelista and Guildo TugononGR No. 110898, February 20, 1996

Statutory rule: If the law makes no distinction, neither should the court.

Facts:Private respondent Guildo Tugonon was charged and convicted of frustrated homicide. He filed a petition for probation. However, the Chief Probation and Parole Officer recommended denial of private respondent's application for probation on the ground that by appealing the sentence of the trial, he had already waived his right to make his application for probation. The RTC set aside the Probation Officer's recommendation and granted private respondent's application on April 23, 1993.

Issue: W/N respondent judge committed a grave abuse of discretion by granting private respondent's application for probation despite the appeal filed by the private respondent.

Held:Yes. Private respondent filed his application for probation on December 28, 1992, after PD 1990 had taken effect. It is thus covered by the prohibition that "no application for probation shall be entertained or granted if the defendant has perfect the appeal from the judgment of conviction" and that "the filing of the application shall deemed a waiver of the right to appeal." having appealed from the judgment of the trial court and applied for probation after the Court of Appeals had affirmed his conviction, private respondent was clearly precluded from the benefits of probation. Furthermore, the law makes no distinction between meritorious and unmeritorious appeals so neither should the court.

Cecilio De Villa vs Court of AppealsGR No. 87416, April 8, 1991

Statutory rule: When the law does not make any exception, courts may not except something unless compelling reasons exist to justify it.

Facts:

Petitioner Cecilio De Villa was charged before the RTC of Makati for violation of Batas Pambansa Bilang 22, the Bouncing Checks Law. Petitioner contends that the check in question was drawn against his dollar account with a foreign bank and as such, it is not covered by the Bouncing Checks Law..

Issue: W/N a foreign check drawn against a foreign account is covered by BP 22.

Held:Yes. The law does not distinguish the currency involved in the case since what the law only specifies is that checks drawn and issued in the Philippines, though payable outside thereof are within the coverage of the law. It is a cardinal rule that where the law does not distinguish, courts should not distinguish. Parenthetically, the rule is that where the law does not make any exception, courts may not except something unless compelling reasons exist to justify it.

***Tolentino vs. Catoy (De. 10, 1948)

9. Expression unios est alterius

The express mention of one person, thing or consequence implies the exclusion of all others.

Rule may be expressed in number of ways:

Expressum facit cessare tacitum what is expressed puts an end to that which is implied where a statute, by its terms, is expressly limited to certain matters, it may not, by interpretation or construction, be extended to other matters. Exception firmat regulam in casibus non exceptis a thing not being excepted must be regarded as coming within the purview of the general rule. Expressio inius est exclusion alterius the expression of one or more things of a class implies the exclusion of all not expressed, even though all would have been implied had none been expressed; opposite the doctrine of necessary implication

Application of expression inius rule

Generally used in construction of statutes granting powers, creating rights and remedies restricting common rights, imposing rights and forfeitures, as well as statutes strictly construed

Limitations of the rule

1. It is not a rule of law, but merely a tool in statutory constructions2. Expressio unius exclusion alterius, no more than auxiliary rule of interpretation to be ignored where other circumstances indicate that the enumeration was not intended to be exclusive3. Does not apply where enumeration is by way of example or to remove doubts only4. Does not apply when in case a statute appears upon its face to limit the operation of its provision to particular persons or things enumerating them, but no reason exists why other persons or things not so enumerated should not have been included and manifest injustice will follow by not including them.5. If it will result in incongruities or a violation of the equal protection clause of the Constitution6. If adherence thereto would cause inconvenience, hardship and injury to the public interest *** Romaualdez vs. Hon. Marcelo and PCGG ( Gr No. 165510-33)*** Go-Tan vs. Spouses Tan (Gr. No. 168552)

10. The use of the term and and the word or or the use of disjunctive and conjunctive words

OR as disjunctive word signifying disassociation and independence of one thing from each of the other things enumerated

OR as to mean AND only when the spirit or context of the law so warrants

OR as that is to say / interpretative / expository giving that which precedes it the same significance as that which follows it

OR as to mean successively to follow the order in which objects, acts or persons have been named in the statue.

AND as conjunctive word used to denote union, binding together or relating one to the other

AND as to men OR only resorted to when a literal interpretation would pervert the plain intention of the legislature as gleaned from the context of the statute or from external factors.

AND / OR construed shall be given to both conjunctive and disjunctive accordingly as one or the other may best effectuate the purpose intended by the legislature.

***Romulo et. Al vs. HDMF ( June 19, 2000)***Concurring opinion of Justice Castro in the case of PCA Inc, vs. Mathay (Oct. 4, 1996)

11. Use of the words may and shall

Mandatory statute is a statute which commands either positively that something be done, or performed in particular way, or negatively that something be not done, leaving the person concerned no choice on the matter except to obey.

A directory statute is a statute which is 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 substantially the same result obtained.

As a general rule, the word shall in a statute implies that the statute is mandatory.The term shall is a word of command and in one which has or which must be given a compulsory meaning and it is generally imperative or mandatory.

The word may is an auxiliary verb showing, among others opportunity or possibility. Under ordinary circumstances the phrase may be implies the possible existence of something.Generally speaking, the use of the word may in a statute denotes that it is directory in nature. The word may is generally permissive only and operates to confer discretion.The word may as used in adjective laws, such as remedial statutes which are construed liberally, is only permissive and not mandatory.

Rule: may should be read as shall Where such construction is necessary to give effect to the apparent intention of the legislature Where a statute provides for doing of some acts which is required by justice or public duty Where it vests a public body or officer with power and authority to take such action which concerns for the public interest or rights of individuals

Rule: shall should be read may When so required by the context or by the intention of the legislature When no public benefit or private right requires that it be given an imperative meaning

Purita Bersabal vs Hon. Judge Serafin SalvadorGr No. L-35910, July 21, 1978

Statutory rule: Use of word may in the statute generally connotes a permissible thing while the word shall is imperative.

Facts:Private respondents filed an ejectment suit against the petitioner. The subsequent decision was appealed by the petitioner and during its pendency, the court issued an order stating that counsels for both parties are given 30 days from receipt of this order within which to file their memoranda in order for this case to be submitted for decision by the court. After receipt, petitioner filed a Motion Ex Parte to Submit Memorandum within 30 days from receipt of Notice of Submission of the transcript of stenographic notes taken during the hearing of the case which was granted by the court. But the respondent judge issued an order dismissing the case for failure to prosecute petitioners appeal. Petitioner filed a motion for reconsideration citing the submitted ex parte motion but the court denied it.

Issue: W/N the mere failure of an appellant to submit the mentioned memorandum would empower the CFI to dismiss the appeal on the ground of failure to prosecute.

Held:The court is not empowered by law to dismiss the appeal on the mere failure of an appellant to submit his memorandum. The law provides that Courts shall decide.. cases on the basis of the evidence and records transmitted from the city courts: providedparties may submit memorandum.. if so requested. It cannot be interpreted otherwise than that the submission of memorandum is optional. Being optional, a party may choose to waive submission of the memoranda. As a general rule, the word may when used in a statute is permissive only and operates to confer discretion; while the word shall is imperative, operating to impose a duty which may be enforced.

Jenette Marie Crisologo vs Globe Telecom, Cesar MaurealGR No. 167631, December 16 2005

Statutory rule: Statutory rule: Use of word may in the statutes generally connotes a permissible thing while the word shall is imperative

c. Strict and Liberal Construction and Interpretation of Statutes

Whether a statute is to be given a strict or liberal construction will depend upon the following:a. The nature of the statuteb. The purpose to be sub servedc. The mischief to be remedied

Purpose: to give the statute the interpretations that will best accomplish the end desired and effectuate legislative intent Strict construction is that construction according to the letter of a statute, which recognizes nothing that is not expressed, takes the language used in its exact meaning and admits no equitable consideration.

The scope of the statute shall not be extended or enlarged by implication, intendment, or equitable consideration beyond the literal meaning of its terms.

Liberal construction means equitable construction as will enlarge the letter of a statute to accomplish its intended purpose, carry out its intent, or promote justice.

The words should receive a fair and reasonable interpretation, so as to attain the intent, spirit and purpose of the law.

Statues Strictly Construed

1. Penal or Criminal Statues are strictly construed against the State and liberally construed in favor of the accused

Centeno vs. Villalon-Pornillos

Held: PD 1564 which punishes a person who solicits or receives contribution for charitable or public welfare purposes without any permit first secured from the Department of Social Services, DID NOT include religious purposes in the acts punishable, the law CANNOT be construed to punish the solicitation of contributions for religious purposes, such as repair or renovation of the church.

Villaseor vs. Oco-Perguerra

Sec. 13 of R.A. No. 3019 not a penalprovisionbut a procedural oneIt is petitioners contention that as a penal statute, the provision on preventive suspension should be strictly construed against the State and liberally in their favor.We cannot agree.Section 13 of R.A. No. 3019on preventive suspensionis not a penalprovision.It is procedural in nature.Hence,the strict constructionrulefinds no application.The Court expounded on thispointinBuenaseda v. Flavier:[34]Penal statutes are strictly construed while procedural statutes are liberally construed (Crawford, Statutory Construction, Interpretation of Laws, pp. 460-461;Lacson v. Romero, 92 Phil. 456 [1953]).The test in determining if a statute is penal is whether a penalty is imposed for the punishment of a wrong to the public or for the redress of an injury to an individual (59 Corpuz Juris, Sec. 658; Crawford, Statutory Construction, pp. 496-497).A Code prescribing the procedure in criminal cases is not a penal statute and is to be interpreted liberally(People v. Adler, 140 N.Y. 331; 35 N.E. 644).[35](Underlining supplied)As We have already established, preventive suspension is not, in actual fact, a penalty at all.It is a proceduralrule.

2. Statutes limiting the rights of individuals

Statutes in derogation of rights Rights are not absolute, and the state, in the exercise of police power, may enact legislation curtailing or restricting their enjoyment. As these statutes are in derogation of common or general rights, they are generally strictly construed and rigidly confined to cases clearly within their scope and purpose.

3. Statutes granting privilegesStatutes granting advantages to private persons or entities have in many instances created special privileges or monopolies for the grantees and have thus been viewed with suspicion and strictly construed

Privilegia recipient largam interpretationem voluntati consonam concedentis privileges are to be interpreted in accordance with the will of him who grants them.

4. Statutes relating to suspension or removal of public officials are strictly construedReason: the remedy of removal is a drastic one and penal in nature. Injustice and harm to the public interest would likely emerge should such laws be not strictly interpreted against the power of suspension or removal

Hebron vs. Reyes

Procedure for removal or suspension should be strictly construed. Statute: Local elective officials are to be removed or suspended, after investigation by the provincial board, subject to appeal to the President. The President has no authority on his own to conduct the investigation and to suspend such elective official.

5. Naturalization laws are strictly construed against the applicant and rigidly followed and enforced.

6. Statutes imposing taxes and customs duties

Taxes statutes must be construed strictly against the government and liberally in favor of the taxpayer

Power to tax involves power to destroy

Reason: taxation is a destructive power which interferes with the personal property rights of the people and takes from them a portion of their property for the support of the government.

7. Statutes granting tax exemptionsLaws granting tax exemptions are thus construed strictissimi juris against the taxpayer and liberally in favor of the taxing authority

Burden of proof on the taxpayer claiming to be exempted

Basis to minimize the different treatment and foster impartiality, fairness and equality of treatment among taxpayers

8. Statutes authorizing suits against the government

Article XVI, Section 3 of the 1987 Constitution The State may not be sued without its consent

General Rule: Sovereign is exempt from suit

Exception: in the form of statute, state may give its consent to be sued, statute is to be strictly construed and waiver from immunity from suit will not to be lightly inferred.

Reason for non-suability not to subject the stet to inconvenience and loss of governmental efficiency

9. Exception to general provisionsThe rules on execution pending appeal must be strictly construed being an exception to the general rule.

Situations which allow exceptions to the requirement of warrant of arrest or search warrant ,must be strictly construed; to do so would infringe upon personal liberty and set back a basic right.

A preference is an exception to the general rule.

A proviso should be interpreted strictly with the legislative intent, should be strictly construed and only those expressly exempted by the proviso should be freed from the operation of the statue. Statutes Liberally Construed

1. General welfare legislations 2 branches

a. One branch attaches to the main trunk of municipal authority relates to such ordinances and regulations as may be necessary to carry into effect and discharge the powers and duties conferred upon local legislative bodies by lawb. Other branch is much more independent of the specific functions enumerated by law authorizes such ordinances as shall seem necessary and proper to provide for health and safety, promote the prosperity, improve the morals, peace, good order of the the LGU and the inhabitant thereof, and for the protection of the property therein

Construed in favor of the LGUs-to give more power to local governments in promoting the economic condition, social welfare, and material progress of the people in the community-construed with proprietary aspects, otherwise would cripple LGUs-must be elastic and responsive to various social conditions-must follow legal progress of a democratic way of life

***Manila Electric Vs. NLRC (1989)***Corporal vs. ECC (1994)

2. Grant of power to Local government units

RA 2264 Local Autonomy Act

Section 12 implied power of a province, a city or a municipality shall be liberally construed in its favor. Any fair and reasonable doubt as to the existence of the power should be interpreted in favor of the local government and it shall be presumed to exist

3. Election LawsElections laws should be reasonably and liberally construed to achieve their purposes

Purpose: to effectuate and safeguard the will of the electorate in the choice of their representatives

Election laws may be divided into three parts for purposes of applying the rules in statutory construction. The first part refers to the provisions for the conduct of elections which elections officials are required to follow. The second part covers those provisions which candidates for office are required to perform. The third part embraces those procedural rules which are designed to ascertain, in case of dispute, the actual winner in the elections.

4. Amnesty proclamationsAmnesty proclamations should be liberally construed as to carry out their purpose to encourage the return to the fold of law of those who have veered from the law.

In case of doubt as to whiter certain persons come within the amnesty proclamation, the doubt should be resolve in their favor and against the State.

5. Statues prescribing prescription of offensesLiberally construed in favor of the accused;Reason: time wears off proof and innocence

People vs. Reyes

Article 91 of the RPC period of prescription shall commence to run from the day the crime is discovered by the offended, authorities,

When does the period of prescription start day of the discovery or registration in the Registry of Deeds?

Held: From the time of registration. Notice need not to be actual for prescription to run; constructive notice is enough. More favorable to the accused if prescriptive period is counted from the time of registration.

6. Adoption statutes are liberally to be construed in favor of the child to be adopted.

7. Veteran and pension laws are enacted to compensate a class of men suffered in the service for hardships they endured and the danger they encountered in line of duty.

8. Rules of Court to be construed liberally, the purpose of the rules of court is for the proper and just determination of a litigation

Procedural laws are no other than technicalities; they are adopted not as ends in themselves but as means conducive to the realization of the administration of law and justice. Rules of Court should not be interpreted to sacrifice substantial rights at the expense of technicalities.

D. Conflicting Statutes

Effects should be given to the entire statues It may happen that in a statute, conflicting clauses and provisions may arise. If such may occur, the statute must be construed as a whole

1. Statutes in Pari Materia

Statutes that relate to the same subject matter, or to the same class of persons or things, or have the same purpose or object.

Statutes in pari material are to be construed together; each legislative act is to be interpreted with reference to other acts relating to the same matter or subject.

However, if statutes of equal theoretical application to a particular case cannot be reconciled, the statute of later date must prevail being a later expression of legislative will.

2. General And Special Statutes

Sometimes we find statutes treating a subject in general terms and another treating a part of the same subject in particularity detailed manner.

If both statutes are irreconcilable, the general statute must give way to the special or particular provisions as an exception to the general provisions.

This is so even if the general statute is later enactment of the legislature and broad enough to include the cases in special law unless there is manifest intent to repeal or later the special law. 3. Statute and Ordinance

If there is conflict an ordinance and a statute, the ordinance must give way.

It is well-settled rule that a substantive law cannot be amended by a procedural law.

A general law cannot repeal a special law.

In case of conflict between a general provision of a special law and a particular provision of a general law, the latter will prevail.

When there is irreconcilable repugnancy between a proviso and the body of a statute, the former prevails as latest expression of legislative intent.

The enactment of a later legislation which is general law cannot be construed to have repealed a special law.

A statute is superior to an administrative circular, thus the latter cannot repeal or amend it.

Where the instrument is susceptible of two interpretations, one which will make it invalid and illegal and another which will make it valid and legal, and the latter interpretation should be adopted.

In case of conflict between an administrative order and the provisions of the Constitutions, the latter prevails.