Statcon Escra Ruling MIDTERMS

I.
INTERPRETATION OF THE CONSTITUTION thedeductionofthewithholdingtaxfromthe

1. GENERALLY salariesofthemembersoftheSupremeCourt,
as well as from the salaries of all other
Nitafan vs. Commissioner of lnternal members of the Judiciary. The Court hereby
Revenue makesofrecordthatithadthendiscardedthe
Constitutional Law;Salaries of Justices and ruling inPerfecto vs. MeerandEndencia vs.
Judges subject to income taxation;Ruling in David, infra,that declared the salaries of
Perfecto vs. Meer and Endencia vs. David, members of the Judiciary exempt from
paymentoftheincometaxandconsideredsuch
discarded.ltmay be pointed out that, early
payment as a diminution of their salaries
on, the Court had dealt with the matter
during their continuance in office. The Court
administrativelyinresponsetorepresentations
hereby reiterates that thesalaries of Justices
that the Court direct its Finance Officer to
and Judges are properly subject to a general
discontinue the withholding of taxes from
incometaxlawapplicabletoallincomeearners
salaries of members of the Bench. Thus, on
and that the payment of such income tax by
June 4, 1987, the Courten banchad re Justices and Judges does not fall within the
affirmedtheChiefJustice'sdirectiveasfollows: constitutional protection against decrease of
"RE: Question of exemption from income theirsalariesduringtheircontinuanceinoffice.
taxation.TheCourtREAFFIRMEDtheChief
Justice'spreviousandstandingdirectivetothe
Fiscal Management and Budget Office of this StatutoryConstruction;Intentoftheframersof
Court to continue with the deduction of the
the organic law and of the people adopting it
withholding taxes from the salaries of the
should be given effect.The debates,
JusticesoftheSupremeCourtaswellasfrom
the salaries of all other members of the interpellations and opinions expressed
judiciary." That should have resolved the regarding the constitutional provision in
question. However, with the filing of this question until it was finally approved by the
petition,theCourthasdeemeditbesttosettle Commission disclosed that the true intent of
the legal issue raised through this judicial the framers of the 1987 Constitution, in
pronouncement.Aswillbeshownhereinafter, adopting it, was to make the salaries of
the clear intent of the Constitutional members of the Judiciary taxable. The
Commissionwastodeletetheproposedexpress ascertainmentofthatintentisbutinkeeping
grantofexemptionfrompaymentofincometax with the fundamental principle of
to members of the Judiciary, so as to "give constitutional construction that the intent of
substance to equality among the three theframersoftheorganiclawandofthepeople
branches of Government" in the words of adoptingitshouldbegiveneffect.Theprimary
Commissioner Rigos. In the course of the task in constitutional construction is to
deliberations, it was further expressly made ascertainandthereafterassuretherealization
clear, specially with regard to Commissioner ofthepurposeoftheframersandofthepeople
JoaquinF.Bernas'acceptedamendmenttothe intheadoptionoftheConstitution.Itmayalso
amendment of Commissioner Rigos, that the besafelyassumedthatthepeopleinratifying
salariesofmembersoftheJudiciarywouldbe the Constitution were guided mainly by the
subjecttothegeneralincometaxappliedtoall explanation offered by the framers. Besides,
taxpayers. This intent was somehow and construingSection10,ArticlesVIII,ofthe1987
inadvertentlynotclearlysetforthinthefinal Constitution, which, for clarity, is again
text of the Constitution as approved and reproducedhereunder:"ThesalaryoftheChief
Justice and of the Associate Justices of the
ratified in February, 1987(infra,pp. 78).
SupremeCourt,andof judges oflower courts
Althoughtheintentmayhavebeenobscuredby
shallbefixedbylaw.Duringtheircontinuance
thefailuretoincludeintheGeneralProvisions
in office, their salary shall not
aproscriptionagainstexemptionofanypublic
bedecreased."(Italicssupplied).Itisplainthat
officer or employee, including constitutional
officers,frompaymentofincometax,theCourt theConstitutionauthorizesCongresstopassa
since then has authorized the continuation of law fixing another rate of compensation of
1 STATCON REVIEWER [ESCRA] Compiled By: Rheyne Robledo

Justices and Judges but such rate must be declarationbyafinaljudgmentofacompetent
higher than that which they are receiving at court that the candidate sought to be
thetimeofenactment,oriflower,itwouldbe disqualified is guilty of or found by the
applicable only to those appointed after its Commission to be suffering from any
approval.Itwouldbeastrainedconstructionto disqualification provided by law or the
read into the provision an exemption from Constitution.
taxation in the light of the discussion in the
Same; Cancellation of Certificate of
ConstitutionalCommission.
Candidacy; Misrepresentation; If a candidate
Filoteo,Jr.vs.Sandiganbayan
cannotbedisqualifiedwithoutapriorfinding
Statutory Construction; The principle of that he or she is suffering from a
prospectivity of statutes, original or disqualification provided by law or the
amendatory, applies to judicial decisions. Constitution, neither can the certificate of
Pursuanttotheabovedoctrine,petitionermay candidacy (CoC) be cancelled or denied due
not claim the benefits of course on grounds of false representations
theMoralesandGalitrulings because he regarding his or her qualifications, without a
executed his extrajudicial confession and his
priorauthoritativefindingthatheorsheisnot
waivertotherighttocounselonMay30,1982,
qualified, such prior authority being the
orbeforeApril 26, 1983. The prospective
necessary measure by which the falsity of the
application of judgemade laws was
underscored inCo vs. Court of Appealswhere representation can be found.Insofar as the
the Court ruled thru Chief Justice Andres R. qualificationofacandidateisconcerned,Rule
Narvasa that in accordance with Article 8 of 25andRule23areflipsidesofonetotheother.
the Civil Code which provides that (j)udicial Bothdo not allow,are not authorizations, are
decisionsapplyingor interpretingthelaws or notvestmentofjurisdiction,fortheCOMELEC
the Constitution shall form part of the legal to determine the qualification of a candidate.
systemofthePhilippines,andArticle4ofthe The facts of qualification must beforehand be
sameCodewhichstatesthat(l)awsshallhave established in a prior proceeding before an
no retroactive effect unless the contrary is authorityproperlyvestedwithjurisdiction.The
provided, the principle of prospectivity of priordeterminationofqualificationmaybeby
statutes,originaloramendatory,shallapplyto statute,byexecutiveorderorbyajudgmentof
judicial decisions, which, although in a competent court or tribunal. If a candidate
themselves are not laws, are nevertheless cannot bedisqualifiedwithout aprior finding
evidenceofwhatthelawmeans. that he or she is suffering from a
disqualification provided by law or the
Constitution, neither can the certificate of
PoeLlamanzares vs. Commission on candidacybecancelledordeniedduecourseon
Elections groundsoffalserepresentationsregardinghis
or her qualifications, without a prior
Disqualification of Candidates; As presently authoritative finding that he or she is not
required,todisqualifyacandidatetheremust qualified, such prior authority being the
be a declaration by a final judgment of a necessarymeasurebywhichthefalsityofthe
competentcourtthatthecandidatesoughttobe representation can be found. The only
disqualified is guilty of or found by the exceptionthatcanbeconcededareselfevident
facts of unquestioned or unquestionable
Commission to be suffering from any
veracity and judicial confessions. Such are,
disqualification provided by law or the anyway, bases equivalent to prior decisions
Constitution.Clearly, the amendment done againstwhichthefalsityofrepresentationcan
in 2012 is an acceptance of the reality of bedetermined.
absence of an authorized proceeding for
determiningbeforeelectionthequalificationsof
candidate.Suchthat,aspresentlyrequired,to 2. LANGUAGE
disqualify a candidate there must be a
J.M.Tuason &Co.,Inc. vs.Land Tenure allowedtoholdother officeor employment in
Administration thegovernmentduringtheirtenurewhensuch
isallowedbylaworbytheprimaryfunctionsof
Same;Same;Same;Ordinary meaning to be theirpositions,membersoftheCabinet,their
giventoprovisions;Exception.Ascertainment deputies andassistants may dosoonlywhen
ofmeaningofprovisionsofConstitutionbegins expresslyauthorizedbytheConstitutionitself.
withthelanguageofthedocumentitself.The Inotherwords,Section7,ArticleIXBismeant
wordsusedintheConstitutionaretobegiven tolaydownthegeneralruleapplicabletoall
theirordinarymeaningexceptwheretechnical elective and appointive public officials and
terms are employed in which case the employees, while Section 13, Article VII is
significancethusattachedtothemprevails.As meanttobetheexceptionapplicableonlytothe
the Constitution is not primarily a lawyers President,theVicePresident,Membersofthe
document,itbeingessentialfortheruleoflaw Cabinet,theirdeputiesandassistants.
toobtainthatitshouldeverbepresentinthe
peoplesconsciousness,itslanguageasmuchas
possibleshouldbeunderstoodinthesensethey La BugalBLaan Tribal Association, Inc.
haveincommonuse.Whatitsaysaccordingto vs.Ramos
the text of the provision to be construed
Prohibition;WordsandPhrases;Prohibitionis
compels acceptance and negates the power of
the courts to alter it, based on the postulate apreventiveremedy;Whiletheexecutionofthe
that the framers and the people mean what contract itself may be fait accompli, its
theysay. implementation is not.Prohibition is a
preventive remedy. It seeks a judgment
Same;Same;Same;Provisions not to he
ordering the defendant to desist from
construed narrowly.Our Constitution, any continuing with the commission of an act
constitution,isnottobeconstruednarrowlyor perceived to be illegal. The petition for
pedantically, for the prescriptions therein prohibition at bar is thus an appropriate
contained, are not mathematical formulas remedy. While the execution of the contract
having their essence in their form, but are
itselfmaybefaitaccompli,itsimplementation
organic living institutions, the significance of
is not. Public respondents, in behalf of the
which is vital not formal. There must be an
Government, have obligations to fulfill under
awareness not only of what has been, but of
saidcontract.Petitionersseektopreventthem
whatmaybe.Thewordsemployedbyitarenot
from fulfilling such obligations on the theory
tobeconstruedtoyieldfixedandrigidanswers
that the contract is unconstitutional and,
butasimpressedwiththenecessaryattributes
therefore,void.
of flexibility and accommodation to enable
them to meet adequately whatever problems If the Constitutional Commission intended to
the future has in store. It is not, in brief, a retaintheconceptofservicecontractsunderthe
printedfinalitybutadynamicprocess.
1973Constitution,itcouldhavesimplyadopted
theoldterminology(servicecontracts)instead
Civil Liberties Union vs. Executive of employing new and unfamiliar terms
Secretary (agreements...involvingeither technicalor
financial assistance).As earlier noted, the
Whileallotherappointiveofficialsinthecivil
phraseservicecontractshasbeendeletedin
service are allowed to hold other office or
the 1987 Constitutions Article on National
employment in the government during their Economy and Patrimony. If the CONCOM
tenurewhensuchisallowedbylaworbythe intended to retain the concept of service
primaryfunctionsoftheirpositions,membersof contractsunderthe1973Constitution,itcould
theCabinet,theirdeputiesandassistantsmay have simply adopted the old terminology
do so only when expressly authorized by the (servicecontracts)insteadofemployingnew
and unfamiliar terms (agreements . . .
Constitution itself.Thus, while all other
involving either technical or financial
appointive officials in the civil service are
assistance). Such a difference between the
language of a provision in a revised presidential appointments from confirmation
constitutionandthatofasimilarprovisionin on the Commission on Appointments except
the preceding constitution is viewed as
appointments to offices mentioned in the first
indicative of a difference in purpose. If, as
sentence of Sec. 16 Article VII.In the 1987
respondents suggest, theconcept of technical
orfinancialassistanceagreementsisidentical Constitution,however,asalreadypointedout,
to that of service contracts, the CONCOM the clear and expressed intent of its framers
would not have bothered to fit the same dog was toexcludepresidential appointments from
with a new collar. To uphold respondents confirmation by the Commission on
theory would reduce the first to a mere Appointments, except appointments to offices
euphemism for the second and render the expressly mentioned in the first sentence of
change in phraseology meaningless. An Sec.16,ArticleVII.Consequently,therewasno
examination of the reason behind the change reasontouseinthethirdsentenceofSec.16,
confirmsthattechnicalorfinancialassistance Article VII the word "alone" after the word
agreements are not synonymous to service "President"inprovidingthatCongressmayby
contracts. [T]he Court in construing a law vest the appointment of lowerranked
Constitution should bear in mind the object officersinthePresidentalone,orinthecourts,
soughttobeaccomplishedbyitsadoption,and or in the heads of departments, because the
the evils, if any, sought to be prevented or power to appoint officers whom he (the
remedied. A doubtful provision will be President)maybeauthorizedbylawtoappoint
examinedinlight of the historyof thetimes, isalreadyvestedinthePresident,withoutneed
and the condition and circumstances under of confirmation by the Commission on
whichtheConstitutionwasframed.Theobject
Appointments,in the second sentence of the
is to ascertain the reason which induced the
sameSec.16,ArticleVII.
framers of the Constitution to enact the
particularprovisionandthepurposesoughtto Same;Same;Same;Same;Same;The
be accomplished thereby, in order to construe word "alone" in the third sentence of Sec. 16
thewholeastomakethewordsconsonantto Art. VII of the 1987 Constitution is a
that reason and calculated to effect that
redundancyinthelightofthesecondsentence
purpose.
of Sec. 16 Article VII.Therefore, the third
sentence of Sec. 16, Article VII could have
3. RULES OF CONSTRUCTION statedmerelythat,inthecaseoflowerranked
officers, the Congress may by law vest their
SarmientoIIIvs.Mison
appointmentinthePresident,inthecourts,or
Statutory Construction;Constitution;Intent of in the heads of various departments of the
theframersoftheconstitutionandofthepeople government.Inshort,theword"alone"inthe
third sentence of Sec. 16, Article VII of the
adopting it must be given effect.The
1987Constitution,asaliteralimportfromthe
fundamental principle of constitutional
lastpartofpar.3,section10,ArticleVIIofthe
constructionistogiveeffecttotheintentofthe
1935Constitution,appearstoberedundantin
framers of the organic law and of the people
the light of the second sentence of Sec. 16,
adoptingit.Theintentiontowhichforceisto
Article VII. And, this redundancy cannot
be given is that which is embodied and
prevailovertheclearandpositiveintentofthe
expressed in the constitutional provisions
framers of the 1987 Constitution that
themselves. The Court will thus construe the
presidential appointments, except those
applicable constitutional provisions, not in
mentioned in the first sentence of Sec. 16,
accordance with how the executive or the
ArticleVII,arenotsubjecttoconfirmationby
legislative department may want them
theCommissiononAppointments.
construed, but in accordance with what they
sayandprovide.
Underthe1987Constitution,theclearand Integrated Bar of the Philippines vs.

expressed intent of its framers is to exclude Zamora

Statutory Construction;Unlike in the broadest discretion in usingthepower to call
power to suspend the privilege of the writ of outbecauseitisconsideredasthelesserand
morebenign power compared tothe power to
habeascorpusorthepowertoproclaimmartial
suspend the privilege of the writ ofhabeas
law in relation to which the Constitution has
corpusand the power to impose martial law,
empoweredCongresstorevokesuchsuspension
both of which involve the curtailment and
or proclamation and the Supreme Court to suppression of certain basic civil rights and
review the sufficiency of the factual basis individual freedoms, and thus necessitating
thereof there is no such equivalent provision safeguards by Congress and review by this
dealing with the revocation or review of the Court.Moreover,underSection18,ArticleVII
Presidentsactiontocalloutthearmedforces,a oftheConstitution,intheexerciseofthepower
distinctionwhichplacesthecallingoutpower tosuspendtheprivilegeofthewritofhabeas
inadifferentcategoryfromthepowertodeclare corpusortoimposemartiallaw,twoconditions
must concur: (1) there must be an actual
martial law and the power to suspend the
invasionorrebellionand,(2)publicsafetymust
privilegeofthewritofhabeascorpus.Under
requireit.Theseconditionsarenotrequiredin
theforegoingprovisions,Congressmayrevoke
the case of the power to call out the armed
suchproclamationorsuspensionandtheCourt
forces.Theonlycriterionisthatwheneverit
mayreviewthesufficiencyofthefactualbasis
becomesnecessary,thePresidentmaycallthe
thereof. However, there is no such equivalent
armed forces to prevent or suppress lawless
provisiondealingwiththerevocationorreview
violence,invasionorrebellion.Theimplication
ofthePresidentsactiontocalloutthearmed
isthatthePresidentisgivenfulldiscretionand
forces. The distinction places the calling out
widelatitudeintheexerciseofthepowertocall
powerinadifferentcategoryfromthepowerto
ascomparedtothetwootherpowers.
declaremartiallawandthepowertosuspend
the privilege of the writ of habeas corpus,
otherwise, the framers of the Constitution Marcelinovs.Cruz,Jr.
wouldhavesimplylumpedtogetherthethree
powers and provided for their revocation and Judgments;Courts;The 90day period for
review without any qualification. Expressio trial courts to decide cases is counted from
unius est exclusio alterius. Where the terms rendition of judgment, not the date of
areexpresslylimitedtocertainmatters,itmay promulgation.Undisputedisthefactthaton
not, by interpretation or construction, be November 28, 1975, or eightyfive [85] days
extended to other matters. That the intent of fromSeptember4,1975thedatethecasewas
the Constitution is exactly what its letter deemed submitted for decision, respondent
says,i.e.,that the power to call is fully judge filedwith the deputyclerk of court the
discretionarytothePresident,isextantinthe decision in Criminal Case No. 5910. He had
deliberationoftheConstitutionalCommission. thus veritably rendered his decision on said
Same;Same;Same;Same;The reason for casewithinthethreemonthperiodprescribed
bytheConstitution.
thedifferenceinthetreatmentofthepowerto
suspend the privilege of the writ of habeas Rules of statutory interpretation apply to the
corpus, the power to declare martial law and Constitution.Such construction applies
the power to call out the armed forces equally to the constitutional provision under
consideration. In Mikell v. School Dis. of
highlightstheintenttograntthePresidentthe
Philadelphia, it was ruled that the legal
widestleewayandbroadestdiscretioninusing
distinction between directory and mandatory
thepowertocalloutbecauseitisconsideredas laws is applicable to fundamental as it is to
thelesserandmorebenignpowercomparedto statutorylaws.
the two other powers.The reason for the
Constitutional Law;The constitutional
difference in the treatment of the
aforementionedpowershighlightstheintentto provision requiring that trial judges shall
grant the President the widest leeway and decideacasewithin90daysfromsubmissionis

merelyaproceduralruleandisnotmandatory, required before judges are allowed to draw
but only directory.To Our mind, the theirsalaries.
phraseology of the provision in question
indicates that it falls within the exception
Covs.Electoral Tribunal oftheHouseof
rather than the general rule. By the phrase
Representatives
unless reduced by the Supreme Court, it is
evident that the period prescribed therein is Statutory Construction;The spirit and
subject to modification by this Court in intendment of the law must prevail over the
accordance with its prerogative under Section
letterthereof,especiallywhereadherencetothe
5[5] of Article X of the New Constitution to
promulgaterulesconcerningpleading,practice latterwouldresultinabsurdityandinjustice.
andprocedureinall courtsx xx.And there Itshouldbenotedthatinconstruingthelaw,
can be no doubt that said provision, having theCourtsarenotalwaystobehedgedinby
been incorporated for reasons of expediency, theliteralmeaningofitslanguage.Thespirit
relates merely to matters of procedure. andintendmentthereof,mustprevailoverthe
Albermarle Oil & Gas Co. v. Morris, declares letter,especiallywhereadherencetothelatter
thatconstitutionalprovisionsaredirectory,and would result in absurdity and injustice. A
not mandatory, where they refer to matters Constitutionalprovisionshouldbeconstruedso
merelyprocedural. as to give it effective operation and suppress
themischiefatwhichitisaimed,hence,itis
In practice, We have assumed a liberal thespiritoftheprovisionwhichshouldprevail
standwithrespecttothisprovision.ThisCourt over the letter thereof. (Jarrolt v. Mabberly,
hadatvarioustimes,uponproperapplication 103U.S.580)InthewordsoftheCourtinthe
andformeritoriousreasons,allowedjudgesof case ofJ.M. Tuason v. LTA(31 SCRA 413
inferior courts additional time beyond the
[1970]: To that primordial intent, all else is
threemonth period within which to decide
subordinated. Our Constitution, any
casessubmittedtothem.Thereasonisthata
constitutionisnottobeconstruednarrowlyor
departure fromsaidprovision wouldresultin
pedantically, for the prescriptions therein
lessinjurytothegeneralpublicthanwouldits
contained, to paraphrase Justice Holmes, are
strictapplication.Toholdthatnoncompliance
not mathematical formulas having their
by the courts with the aforesaid provision
essence in their form but are organic living
wouldresultinlossofjurisdiction,wouldmake
institutions, the significance of which is vital
the courts, through which conflicts are
notformal.....
resolved, the very instruments to foster
unresolvedcauses by reason merely of having
failed to render a decision within the alloted 4. AIDS IN INTERPRETATION
term.Suchanabsurdsituationcouldnothave
Legaspivs.MinisterofFinance
been intended by the framers of our
fundamentallaw. Constitutional Law;Constitutional
Same;Same;Judges;Failure of judge to provisionsaretobeinterpretednotonlyonthe
decide a case within 90 days does not divest basis of current events, but also on the basis
him of his jurisdiction.One last point. ofthehistoricalbackgroundoftheirenactment.
Notwithstanding Our conclusion that courts Constitutional law is not simply the literal
arenotdivestedoftheirjurisdictionforfailure application of the words of the Charter. The
todecideacasewithintheninetydayperiod, ancient and familiar rule of constitutional
Wehereemphasizetherule,fortheguidanceof construction that has consistently maintained
the judges manning our courts, that cases its intrinsic and transcendental worth is that
pending before their salas must be decided the meaning and understanding conveyed by
within the aforementioned period. Failure to the language, albeit plain, of any of its
observe said rule constitutes a ground for provisionsdonotonlyportraytheinfluenceof
administrativesanctionagainstthedefaulting currenteventsanddevelopmentsbutlikewise
judge. In fact, a certificate to this effect is the inescapable imperative considerations
rooted in the historical background and
environment at the time of its adoption and
therebycausedtheirbeingwrittenaspartand
parcel thereof. As long as this Court adheres
closesttothisperspectiveinviewinganyattack De Castro vs. Judicial and Bar Council
againstanypartoftheConstitution,totheend (JBC)
of determining what it actually encompasses
LocusStandi;Requisites;WordsandPhrases;
and how it should be understood, no one can
say We have misguided Ourselves. None can Inpublicorconstitutionallitigations,theCourt
reasonablycontendWearetreadingthewrong isoftenburdenedwiththedeterminationofthe
way. locusstandiofthepetitionersduetotheever
present need to regulate the invocation of the
interventionoftheCourttocorrectanyofficial
Montejovs.CommissiononElections
action or policy in order to avoid obstructing
Constitutional Law;Election theefficientfunctioningofpublicofficialsand
Law;COMELEC;The basic powers of officesinvolvedinpublicservice;Blackdefines
respondent COMELEC, as enforcer and locusstandiasarightofappearanceinacourt
administratorofourelectionlaws,arespelled of justice on a given question.Black
outinblackandwhiteinSection2(c),Article defineslocusstandiasarightofappearancein
IX of the Constitution.The basic powers of acourtofjusticeonagivenquestion.Inpublic
respondent COMELEC, as enforcer and orconstitutionallitigations,theCourtisoften
administratorofourelectionlaws,arespelled burdened with the determination of thelocus
outinblackandwhiteinSection2(c),Article standiofthepetitionersduetotheeverpresent
IX of the Constitution. Rightly, respondent need to regulate the invocation of the
COMELECdoesnotinvokethisprovisionbut interventionoftheCourttocorrectanyofficial
reliesontheOrdinanceappendedtothe1987 action or policy in order to avoid obstructing
Constitution as the source of itspower of theefficientfunctioningofpublicofficialsand
redistrictingwhichistraditionallyregardedas officesinvolvedinpublicservice.Itisrequired,
partofthepowertomakelaws.TheOrdinance therefore, that the petitioner must have a
isentitledApportioningtheSeatsoftheHouse personal stake in the outcome of the
of Representatives of the Congress of the controversy, for, as indicated inAgan, Jr.
Philippines to the Different Legislative v.Philippine International Air Terminals Co.,
Districts in Provinces and Cities and the Inc.,402SCRA612(2003):Thequestionon
MetropolitanManilaArea.
legal standing is whether such parties
haveallegedsuchapersonalstakeinthe
Veravs.Avelino outcome of the controversy as to assure
thatconcreteadversenesswhichsharpens
CONSTRUCTION OF
thepresentationofissuesuponwhichthe
CONSTITUTION;WEIGHT OF
courtsolargelydependsforillumination
PROCEEDINGS OF CONSTITUTIONAL
of difficult constitutional
CONVENTION.The proceedings of the
Constitutional Convention are less questions.Accordingly, it has been held
conclusiveofthe proper construction of the thattheinterestofapersonassailingthe
constitutionthanarelegislativeproceedingsof constitutionality of a statute must be
theproperconstructionofastatute. direct and personal. He must be able to
show, not only that the law or any
CONSTITUTION;COAUTHORS IN BETTER
governmentactisinvalid,butalsothathe
POSITION TO CONSTRUE.The coauthors
sustained or is in imminent danger of
ofthefundamentallawareinabetterposition
sustaining some direct injury as a result
to construe the very document in which they
haveinfused the ideas which boild in their ofitsenforcement,andnotmerelythathe
minds, and gave a definite form to their own sufferstherebyinsomeindefiniteway.It
convictionanddecisions. mustappearthatthepersoncomplaining

has been or is about to be denied andprinciples.Their provisions command the
someright or privilege to which he is legislature to enact laws and carry out the
lawfullyentitledorthatheisabouttobe purposes of theframerswhomerely establish
subjectedtosomeburdensorpenaltiesby an outline of government providing for the
reasonofthestatuteoractcomplainedof. different departments of the governmental
machinery and securing certain fundamental
and inalienable rights of citizens. A provision
which lays down a general principle, such as
thosefoundinArt.IIofthe1987Constitution,
is usually not selfexecuting. But a provision
5. SELF EXECUTING PROVISIONS which is complete in itself and becomes
Taadavs.Angara operativewithouttheaidofsupplementaryor
enabling legislation, or that which supplies
Constitutional Principles and State sufficient rulebymeans ofwhichtheright it
Policies;The principles and state policies grants may be enjoyed or protected, is self
enumeratedinArticleII and some sections of executing. Thus a constitutional provision is
ArticleXIIarenotselfexecutingprovisions,the selfexecuting if the nature and extent of the
disregardofwhichcangiverisetoacauseof right conferred and the liability imposed are
fixedbytheconstitutionitself,sothattheycan
actioninthecourts.Byitsverytitle,ArticleII
be determined by an examination and
of the Constitution is a declaration of
construction of its terms, and there is no
principlesandstatepolicies.Thecounterpart
languageindicatingthatthesubjectisreferred
ofthisarticleinthe1935Constitutioniscalled
tothelegislatureforaction.
the bas ic political creed of the nation by
DeanVicenteSinco.TheseprinciplesinArticle Unless it is expressly provided that a
II are not intended to be selfexecuting legislative act is necessary to enforce a
principles ready for enforcement through the
constitutionalmandate,thepresumptionnowis
courts.Theyareusedbythejudiciaryasaids
that all provisions of the constitution are self
or as guides in the exercise of its power of
judicial review, and by the legislature in its executing.Asagainstconstitutionsofthepast,
enactmentoflaws.Asheldintheleadingcase modern constitutions have been generally
ofKilosbayan, Incorporated vs. Morato, the drafted upon a different principle and have
oftenbecomeineffectextensivecodesoflaws
principles and state policies enumerated in
intendedtooperatedirectlyuponthepeoplein
ArticleIIandsomesectionsofArticleXIIare
a manner similar to that of statutory
notselfexecutingprovisions,thedisregardof
enactments,andthefunctionofconstitutional
whichcangiverisetoacauseofactioninthe
conventionshasevolvedintoonemorelikethat
courts. They do not embody judicially
of a legislative body. Hence, unless it is
enforceableconstitutionalrightsbutguidelines
expressly provided that a legislative act is
forlegislation.
necessarytoenforceaconstitutionalmandate,
the presumption now is that all provisions of
Manila Prince Hotel vs. Government the constitution are selfexecuting. If the
ServiceInsuranceSystem constitutional provisions are treated as
requiring legislation instead of selfexecuting,
Statutory Construction;A constitutional thelegislaturewouldhavethepowertoignore
provision is selfexecuting if the nature and and practically nullify the mandate of the
extent of the right conferred and the liability fundamentallaw.Thiscanbecataclysmic.
imposedarefixedbytheconstitutionitself,so Minordetailsmaybelefttothelegislature
thattheycanbedeterminedbyanexamination without impairing the selfexecuting nature of
and.construction of its terms, and there is no constitutional provisions.Quite apparently,
languageindicatingthatthesubjectisreferred Sec.10,secondpar.,ofArt.XIIiscouchedin
tothelegislatureforaction.Admittedly,some suchawayasnottomakeitappearthatitis
constitutionsaremerelydeclarationsofpolicies nonselfexecuting but simply for purposes of

style. But, certainly, the legislature is not thetenorofthefirstandthirdparagraphs of
precludedfromenactingfurtherlawstoenforce the same section which undoubtedly are not
the constitutional provision so long as the selfexecuting. The argument is flawed. If the
contemplated statute squares with the first and third paragraphs are not self
Constitution.Minordetailsmaybelefttothe executing because Congress is still to enact
legislaturewithoutimpairingtheselfexecuting measures to encourage the formation and
natureofconstitutionalprovisions. operation of enterprises fully owned by
Filipinos, as in the first paragraph, and the
Same;Same;Same;The omission from a
State still needs legislation to regulate and
constitution of any express provision for a exercise authority over foreign investments
remedyforenforcingarightorliabilityisnot withinitsnationaljurisdiction,asinthethird
necessarily an indication that it was not paragraph, then afortiori,by the same logic,
intendedtobeselfexecutingtheruleisthata thesecondparagraphcanonlybeselfexecuting
selfexecutingprovisionoftheconstitutiondoes as it does not by its language require any
notnecessarilyexhaustlegislativepoweronthe legislation in order to give preference to
qualified Filipinos in the grant of rights,
subject,butanylegislationmustbeinharmony
privileges and concessions covering the
with the constitution, further the exercise of national economy and patrimony. A
constitutional right and make it more constitutional provision may be selfexecuting
available.In selfexecuting constitutional inonepartandnonselfexecutinginanother
provisions, the legislature may still enact
legislation to facilitate the exercise of powers
directlygrantedbytheconstitution,furtherthe
operation of such a provision, prescribe a
practicetobeusedforitsenforcement,provide
a convenient remedy forthe protection of the Oposavs.Factoran,Jr.
rightssecuredorthedeterminationthereof,or
Actions;Class Suit;The subject matter of the
place reasonable safeguards around the
complaint is of common and general interest
exercise of the right. The mere fact that
legislation may supplement and add to or not just to several, but to all citizens of the
prescribeapenaltyfortheviolationofaself Philippines;Alltherequisitesforthefilingofa
executing constitutional provision does not validclasssuitunderSection12Rule3ofthe
render such a provision ineffective in the RevisedRulesofCourtarepresent.Petitioners
absenceofsuchlegislation.Theomissionfrom institutedCivilCaseNo.90777asaclasssuit.
a constitution of any express provision for a The original defendant and the present
remedyforenforcingarightorliabilityisnot respondents did not take issue with this
necessarily an indication that it was not matter.Nevertheless,Weherebyrulethatthe
intendedtobeselfexecuting.Theruleisthata saidcivilcaseisindeedaclasssuit.Thesubject
selfexecutingprovisionoftheconstitutiondoes matter of the complaint is of common and
not necessarily exhaust legislative power on generalinterestnotjusttoseveral,buttoall
the subject, but any legislation must be in citizensofthePhilippines.Consequently,since
harmony with the constitution, further the the parties are so numerous, it becomes
exercise of constitutional right and make it impracticable,ifnottotallyimpossible,tobring
moreavailable.Subsequentlegislationhowever all of them before the court. We likewise
does not necessarily mean that the subject declare that the plaintiffs therein are
constitutional provision is not, by itself, fully numerousandrepresentativeenoughtoensure
enforceable. the full protection of all concerned interests.
Same;Same;Same;A constitutional Hence,alltherequisitesforthefilingofavalid
class suit under Section 12, Rule 3 of the
provisionmaybeselfexecutinginonepartand
RevisedRulesofCourtarepresentbothinthe
nonselfexecuting in another.Respondents saidcivilcaseandintheinstantpetition,the
alsoarguethatthenonselfexecutingnatureof
latterbeingbutanincidenttotheformer.
Sec.10,secondpar.,ofArt.XIIisimpliedfrom

proceeding, or whether the second action is
II. STARE DECISIS, RES JUDICATA, LAW OF upon the same or a different cause of action,
THE CASE subjectmatter,claimordemand,astheearlier
action.Insuchcases,itisalsoimmaterialthat
Villenavs.Chavez
thetwoactionsarebasedondifferentgrounds,
Judgments;Stare Decisis;Words and ortriedondifferenttheories,orinstitutedfor
Phrases;When a court has laid down a different purposes, and seek different reliefs.
By the same token, whatever is once
principleoflawasapplicabletocertainstateof
irrevocablyestablishedas thecontrolling egal
facts,itwilladheretothatprincipleandapply principleordecisioncontinuestobethelawof
it to all future cases in which the facts are thecasebetweenthesamepartiesinthesame
substantially the same; Stare decisis simply case, whether correct on general principles or
means that for the sake of certainty, a not,solongasthefactsonwhichsuchdecision
conclusion reached in one case should be waspredicatedcontinuetobethefactsofthe
casebeforethecourt.
applied to those that follow if the facts are
substantiallythesame,eventhoughtheparties
maybedifferent.Westressthatwhenacourt Agustinvs.CourtofAppeals
haslaiddownaprincipleoflawasapplicableto
a certain stateof facts, it will adhere to that Judgments;Law of the Case;Words and
principle and apply it to all future cases in Phrases;The principle of law of the case is
which the facts are substantially the defined as a term applied to an established
same.Staredecisisetnonquietamovere.Stand rulethatwhenanappellatecourtpassesona
by the decisions and disturb not what is question and remands the cause to the lower
settled.Staredecisissimplymeansthatforthe courtforfurtherproceedings,thequestionthere
sakeofcertainty,aconclusionreachedinone settled becomes the law of the case upon
case should be applied to those that follow if
subsequentappeal.Itisclear,therefore,that
the facts are substantially the same, even
the appellate court had already settled the
thoughthepartiesmaybedifferent.Itproceeds
proprietyofawardingrepossessionexpensesin
fromthefirstprincipleofjusticethat, absent
favorofprivaterespondent.Theremandofthe
any powerful countervailing considerations,
case to RTC, Branch 40 was for the sole
likecasesoughttobedecidedalike.
purposeofthreshingoutthecorrectamountof
expensesandnotforrelitigatingtheaccuracy
Veloso,Jr.vs.CourtofAppeals of the award. Thus, the findings of RTC,
Branch40,asaffirmedbytheappellatecourt
Whateverisonceirrevocablyestablishedasthe in CAG.R. No. 24684, were confined to the
controllinglegalprincipleordecisioncontinues appreciation of evidence relative to the
to be the law of the case between the same repossession expenses for the query or issue
passed upon by the respondent court in CA
parties in the same case whether correct on
G.R. No. 56718R (propriety of the award for
generalprinciplesornotsolongasthefactson repossessionexpenses)hasbecomethelawof
whichsuchdecisionwaspredicatedcontinueto thecase.Thisprincipleisdefinedasaterm
be the facts of the case before the court. applied to an established rule that when an
Materialfactsorquestionswhichwereinissue appellate court passes on a question and
inaformeractionandwerethereadmittedor remands the cause to the lower court for
judicially determined are conclusively settled furtherproceedings,thequestiontheresettled
byajudgmentrenderedthereinandthatsuch becomes thelaw of thecaseuponsubsequent
factsorquestionsbecomeresjudicataandmay appeal. Having exactlythesameparties and
not again be litigated in a subsequent action issues,thedecisionintheformerappeal(CA
between the same parties or their privies, G.R.No.56718R)isnowtheestablishedand
regardlessoftheformtheissuemaytakeinthe controlling rule. Petitioner may not therefore
subsequent action, whether the subsequent beallowedinasubsequentappeal(CAG.R.No.
actioninvolvesthesameoradifferentformof 24684) andin this petition toresuscitate and
revive formerly settled issues. Judgment of enunciatedinOmotoy,theSupremeCourt
courts should attain finality at some point in entertains appeals in criminal cases only
time,asinthiscase,otherwise,therewillbeno
where the penalty imposed isreclusion
endtolitigation.
perpetuaor higher. The basis for this
doctrine is the Constitution itself which
De Mesa vs. Pepsi Cola Products Phils., empowers this Court to review, revise,
Inc. reverse,modifyoraffirmonappeal,asthe
Stare Decisis;The doctrine of stare decisis is lawortheRulesofCourtmayprovide,final
basedontheprinciplethatonceaquestionof judgments of lower courts in all criminal
lawhasbeenexaminedanddecided,itshould cases in which the penalty imposed
be deemed settled and closed to further isreclusionperpetuaorhigher. 1
argument.Theprincipleofstaredecisisetnon Villanueva,Jr.vs.CourtofAppeals
quietamovereisentrenchedinArticle8ofthe Judgments;Obiter Dicta;Words and
Civil Code, to wit: ART. 8. Judicial decisions Phrases;Anobiterdictumhasbeendefinedas
applying or interpreting the laws or the
an opinion expressed by a court upon some
Constitution shall form a part of the legal
question of law which is not necessary to the
systemofthePhilippines.Itenjoinsadherence
tojudicialprecedents.Itrequiresourcourtsto decision of the case before it.Anobiter
follow a rule already established in a final dictumhas been defined as an opinion
decision of the Supreme Court. That decision expressedbyacourtuponsomequestionoflaw
becomesajudicialprecedenttobefollowedin which is not necessary to the decision of the
subsequentcasesbyallcourtsintheland.The casebeforeit.Itisaremarkmade,oropinion
doctrine ofstare decisisis based on the expressed, by a judge, in his decision upon a
principlethatonceaquestionoflawhasbeen cause, by the way, that is, incidentally or
examined and decided, it should be deemed collaterally,andnotdirectlyuponthequestion
settledandclosedtofurtherargument. before him, or upon a point not necessarily
involvedinthedeterminationofthecause,or
introducedbywayofillustration,oranalogyor
III. RATIO DECIDENDI AND OBITER DICTUM argument.Sucharenotbindingasprecedent.
Mercadovs.People Same;Same;Same;An adjudication on
any point within the issues presented by the
Weseenoerrorbytheappellatecourt in
casecannotbeconsideredasobiterdictum,and
relying on aFootnoteinOmotoy to affirm
12
this rule applies to all pertinent questions,

the conviction of the accused. The
althoughonlyincidentallyinvolved,whichare
substance of theFootnotemay not be
presentedanddecidedintheregularcourseof
theratio decidendiof the case, but it still theconsiderationofthecase,andleduptothe
constitutes an important part of the
final conclusion, and to any statement as to
decisionsinceitenunciatesafundamental
matteronwhichthedecisionispredicated.It
procedural ruleintheconduct ofappeals.
hasbeenheldthatanadjudicationonanypoint
That this rule is stated in aFootnoteto a withintheissuespresentedbythecasecannot
decisionisofnoconsequenceasitismerely be considered asobiter dictum,and this rule
amatterofstyle. applies to all pertinent questions, although
onlyincidentallyinvolved,whicharepresented
ItmaybearguedthatOmotoyisnotonall and decided in the regular course of the
fourswiththeinstantcasesincetheformer considerationofthecase,andleduptothefinal
involvesanappealfromtheRegionalTrial conclusion,andtoanystatementastomatter
on which the decision is predicated.
CourttotheSupremeCourtwhilethecase
Accordingly,apointexpresslydecideddoesnot
at bar is an appeal from the Court of
lose its value as a precedent because the
Appeals to the Supreme Court. As
dispositionofthecaseis,ormighthavebeen, oremployeefoundtobeatfault,tothepublic
madeonsomeotherground,oreventhough,by officialconcerned.Fortheirpart,theSolicitor
reason of other points in the case, the result General and the Office of the Ombudsman
reachedmighthavebeenthesameifthecourt argue that the word recommend must be
had held, on the particular point, otherwise taken in conjunction with the phrase and
than it did. A decision which the case could
ensure compliance therewith.The proper
have turned on is not regarded asobiter interpretation of the Courts statement
dictummerelybecause,owingtothedisposalof inTapiadorshould be that the Ombudsman
the contention, it was necessary to consider has the authority to determine the
anotherquestion,norcananadditionalreason administrative liability of a public official or
in a decision, brought forward after the case employee at fault, and direct and compel the
has been disposed of on one ground, be head of the office or agency concerned to
regarded asdicta.So, also, where a case implement the penalty imposed. In other
presents two (2) or more points, any one of words,itmerelyconcernstheproceduralaspect
which is sufficient to determine the ultimate of the Ombudsmans functions and not
issue, but the court actually decides all such
itsjurisdiction.Weagreewiththeratiocination
points,thecaseasanauthoritativeprecedent
ofpublicrespondents.Severalreasonsmilitate
as to every point decided, and none of such
against a literal interpretation of the subject
pointscanberegardedashavingthestatusof
constitutional provision. Firstly, a cursory
adictum,and one point should not be denied
readingofTapiadorrevealsthatthemainpoint
authority merely because another point was
ofthecasewasthefailureofthecomplainant
more dwelt on and more fully argued and
thereintopresentsubstantialevidencetoprove
considered, nor does a decision on one
the charges of the administrative case. The
proposition make statements of the court
statementthatmadereferencetothepowerof
regardingotherpropositionsdicta.
the Ombudsman is, at best, merely anobiter
dictumand, as it is unsupported by sufficient
explanation, is susceptible to varying
Ledesmavs.CourtofAppeals
interpretations,aswhatpreciselyisbeforeus
Judgments;Obiter Dicta;The statement in in this case. Hence, it cannot be cited as a
Tapiador v. Office of the Ombudsman, 379 doctrinaldeclarationofthisCourtnorisitsafe
fromjudicialexamination.
SCRA 322, 333 (2002) that made reference to
thepoweroftheOmbudsmanis,atbest,merely Same;Same;Same;That the refusal,
anobiterdictumand,asitisunsupportedby withoutjustcause,ofanyofficertocomplywith
sufficientexplanation,issusceptibletovarying an order of the Ombudsman to penalize an
interpretationsit cannot be cited as a erring officer or employee is a ground for
doctrinaldeclarationoftheSupremeCourtnor disciplinaryaction,isastrongindicationthat
isitsafefromjudicialexamination.Petitioner the Ombudsmans recommendation is not
insiststhatthewordrecommendbegivenits merely advisory in nature but is actually
literalmeaning;thatis,thattheOmbudsmans mandatory within the bounds of the law;By
action is only advisory in nature rather than statingthattheOmbudsmanrecommendsthe
onehavinganybindingeffect,citingTapiador actiontobetakenagainstanerringofficeror
v.OfficeoftheOmbudsman,thus:...Besides, employee, the provisions in the Constitution
assumingarguendo, that petitioner were and in RA 6770 intended that the
administrativelyliable,theOmbudsmanhasno
implementationoftheorderbecoursedthrough
authoritytodirectlydismissthepetitionerfrom
theproperofficer,whichinthiscasewouldbe
thegovernmentservice,moreparticularlyfrom
his position in the BID. Under Section 13, theheadoftheBID.Wenotethattheproviso
subparagraph (3), of Article XI of the 1987 abovequalifiestheordertoremove,suspend,
Constitution, the Ombudsman can only demote, fine, censure, or prosecute an officer
recommendtheremovalofthepublicofficial oremployeeakintothequestionedissuances

in the case at bar. That the refusal, without to the extent that they are applicable, the
justcause,ofanyofficertocomplywithsuchan criteriawhichmustcontroltheactuationsnot
orderoftheOmbudsmantopenalizeanerring onlyofthosecalledupontoabidetherebybut
officeroremployeeisagroundfordisciplinary alsoofthoseindutyboundtoenforceobedience
action, is a strong indication that the thereto.
Ombudsmansrecommendationisnotmerely
Statutes;Term "gift enterprise" is used in
advisory in nature but is actually mandatory
within the bounds of law. This should not be association with word "lottery"Inthe Postal
interpretedasusurpationbytheOmbudsman Law the term "gift enterprise" is used in
of the authority of the head of office or any associationwiththeword"lottery."Consonant
officerconcerned.Ithaslongbeensettledthat to the wellknown principle of legal
the power of the Ombudsman to investigate hermeneuticsnosciturasociis,itisonlylogical
andprosecuteanyillegalactoromissionofany that the term be accorded no other meaning
publicofficialisnotanexclusiveauthoritybut thenthatwhichisconsistentwiththenatureof
asharedorconcurrentauthorityinrespectof thewordassociatedtherewith.Hence,iflottery
theoffensecharged.Bystatingthereforethat isprohibitedonlyifitinvolvesaconsideration,
theOmbudsmanrecommendstheactiontobe so also must the term "gift enterprise" be so
takenagainstanerringofficeroremployee,the construed. Significantly, there is not the
provisionsintheConstitutionandinRA6770 slightestindiciuminthelawof anyintent to
intendedthattheimplementationoftheorder eliminatetheelementofconsiderationfromthe
becoursedthroughtheproperofficer,whichin "giftenterprisethereinincluded.
thiscasewouldbetheheadoftheBID.
Generalvs.Barrameda
IV. STATUTORY CONSTRUCTION Statutoryinterpretation;Sales;Thetermsale

1. HOW BILL BECOMES A LAW or auction sale as used in different laws
2. ENROLLED BILL DOCTRINE relatingtoforeclosureofmortgagesandsaleof
property refers only to one actthe sale at
3. DEFINITION, PURPOSE AND CONCEPT
publicauctionand,therefore,itisimmaterial
Caltex(Philippines),Inc.vs.Palomar
that in such laws the word sale or auction
Statutes;Construction defined. saleisused.Thecrucialissuetodetermineis
Constructionistheartorprocessofdiscovering thechoiceofwhatruletoapplyindetermining
andexpoundingthemeaning'andintentionof the start of the one year redemption period,
the authors of the lawwith respect to its whether from the date of the auction sale or
from that of the registration of the sale with
application to a given case,where that
the registry of deeds. In other words, it is
intention is rendered doubtful, amongst
whetheraliteralinterpretationoftheprovision
others,byreasonofthefactthatthegivencase of Section 31 of C.A. 459that the period of
isnotexplicitlyprovidedforinthelaw(Black, redemption shall start from the date of the
Interpretation of Laws, p. 1). In the present auction saleshall govern, or whether the
case,thequestionofwhetherornotthescheme words, auction sale, shall be considered in
proposedbytheappelleeiswithinthecoverage their ordinary meaning or in the same sense
oftheprohibitiveprovisionsofthePostalLaw that sale is used in the texts of Section 26,
inescapably requires an inquiry into the now30,ofRule39oftheRulesofCourt,and
intended meaning of the words used therein. Section 26 of Act 2938, now Section 20, R.A.
This isasmuch aquestionofconstructionor 1300(CharterofPNB).xxxWeareoftheview
interpretationasanyother. that a correct solution to the foregoing issue
Same;Weight of judicial decisions.In this mustentailnotmerelytryingtodeterminethe
meaningofthewordsauctionsaleandsale
jurisdiction,judicialdecisionsassumethesame
in different legislative enactments, but, more
authority as the statute itself and, until'
importantly,adeterminationofthelegislative
authoritativelyabandoned,necessarilybecome,
intent which is quite a task to achieve as it
depends more on a determination of the EndenciaandJugovs.David,etc
purpose and objective of the law in giving
CONSTITUTIONAL LAW ; TAXATION;
mortgagors a period of redemption of their
INTERPRETATION OF LAWS, A JUDICIAL
foreclosed properties. Mortgagors whose
FINCTION.The Legislature cannot lawfully
propertiesareforeclosedandarepurchasedby
declare the collection of income tax on the
themortgageeashighestbidderattheauction
salary of a public official, specially a judicial
sale are decidedly at a great disadvantage
officer, not a decrease of his salary, after the
because almost invariably mortgagors forfeit
Supreme Court has found and decided
their properties at a great loss as they are
otherwise."Definingandinterpretingthelawis
purchased at nominal costs by the mortgagee
ajudicialfunctionandthelegislativebranch
himselfwhoordinarilybidsinnomorethanhis
maynotlimitorrestrictthepowergrantedto
creditorthebalancethereofattheauctionsale.
the courts by the Constitution."
That is thereasonwhythelawgivesthema
chance to redeem their properties within a (Bandyvs.Mickelsonetal.,44N.W.,2nd,341,
fixed period. It cannot be denied that in all 342;see also11 Am. Jur., 714715 and 905.)
foreclosuresofmortgagesandsaleofproperty TheactofinterpretingtheConstitutionorany
pursuant to execution, whether judicial or partthereofbytheLegislatureisaninvasionof
extrajudicial in nature, under different thewelldefinedand establishedprovinceand
legislativeenectments,apublicauctionsaleis jurisdiction of the Judiciary, SEPARATION OF
an indispensable prerequisite to the valid POWERSUnder our system of constitutional
disposalofpropertiesusedascollateralforthe government, the Legislative department is
obligation. So that whether the legislators in assigned the power to make and enact laws.
differentlawsusedthetermsaleorauction TheExecutivedepartmentischargedwiththe
saleisofnomoment,sincethepresumptionis execution or carrying out of the provisions of
that when they used those words sale and said laws. But the interpretation and
auctionsaleinterchangeablyindifferentlaws application of said laws belong exclusively to
theyreallyreferredtoonlyoneactthesaleat theJudicialdepartment.Andthisauthorityto
public auction indispensably necessary in the interpret and apply the laws extends to the
disposition of mortgaged properties and those Constitution. Before the courts can determine
leviedupontopaythecivilobligationsoftheir whether alaw is constitutionalor not, itwill
owners. have to interpret and ascertain the meaning
notonlyofsaidlaw,butalsoofthepertinent
portion of the Constitution in order to decide
Molina vs. Rafferty. whether there is a conflict between the two,
STATUTORY CONSTRUCTION;CARDINAL becauseif there is, thenthelaw will have to
RULE."Asmenwhoseintentionsrequireno give way and has to be declared invalid and
concealmentgenerallyemploythewordswhich unconstitutional.
mostdirectlyandaptlyexpresstheideasthey
intendtoconvey,theenlightenedpatriotswho TAXATION;INCOME TAX, TAXING SALARIES OF
framed our Constitution, and the people who JUDICIAL OFFICERS A DIMINUTION OF THEIR
adopted it, must be understood to have COMPENSATION ASFIXED BYLAWThedoctrine
employedwordsintheirnaturalsense,andto laiddowninthecaseofPerfectovs.Meer(85
haveintendedwhattheyhavesaid." Phil., 552) to the effect that the collection of
incometaxonthesalaryofajudicialofficerisa
OPINION OF EXECUTIVE OFFICIALS. diminution thereof and so violates the
Courts will and should respect the Constitution,isreiterated.
contemporaneous construction placed upon a
statutebytheexecutiveofficers,whosedutyit Angaravs.ElectoralCommission
istoenforceit,andunlesssuchinterpretation CONSTITUTIONAL LAW;SEPARATION OF
isclearlyerroneouswillordinarilybecontrolled POWERS.The separation of powers is a
thereby. fundamental principle in our system of
government. It obtains not through express
provision but by actual division in our
4. POWER TO CONSTRUE; LIMITATIONS
Constitution. Each department of the

government has exclusive cognizance of express constitutional grant is found in their
matterswithinitsjurisdiction,andissupreme constitution,thepossessionofthismoderating
withinitsownsphere. power of the courts, not to speak of its
historical origin and development there, has
JUDICIARY THE ONLY CONSTITUTIONAL
beensetatrestbypopularacquiescencefora
ARBITER TO ALLOCATE
periodofmorethanoneandahalfcenturies.In
CONSTITUTIONAL BOUNDARIES.But in
ourcase,thismoderatingpowerisgranted,if
themain,theConstitutionhasblockedoutwith
notexpressly,byclearimplicationfromsection
deft strokes and in bold lines, allotment of
2ofarticleVIIIofourConstitution.
powertotheexecutive,thelegislativeandthe
judicial departments of the government. The WHAT is MEANT BY "JUDICIAL
overlapping and interlacing of functions and SUPREMACY".The Constitution is a
duties between the several departments, definitionofthepowersofgovernment.Whois
however,sometimesmakesithardtosayjust to determine the nature, scope and extent of
wheretheoneleavesoffandtheotherbegins. such powers? The Constitution itself has
In times of social disquietude or political provided for the instrumentality of the
excitement, the great landmarks of the judiciary as the rational way. And when the
Constitutionareapttobeforgottenormarred, judiciary mediates to allocate constitutional
ifnotentirelyobliterated.Incasesofconflict, boundaries, it does not assert any superiority
the judicial department is the only over the other departments; it does not in
constitutionalorganwhichcanbecalledupon reality nullify or invalidate an act of the
to determine the proper allocation of powers Legislature, but only asserts the solemn and
between the several departments and among sacred obligation assigned to it by the
theintegralorconstituentunitsthereof. Constitutiontodetermineconflictingclaimsof
authority under the Constitution and to
MODERATINGPOWEROFTHEJUDICIARY
establish for the parties in an actual
is GRANTED, IF NOT EXPRESSLY, BY
controversy the rights which that instrument
CLEAR IMPLICATION.As any human
secures and guarantees to them. This is in
production, our Constitution is of course
truth all that is involved in what is termed
lacking perfection and perfectibility, but as
"judicial supremacy" which properly is the
muchasitwaswithinthepowerofourpeople,
powerofjudicialreviewundertheConstitution.
acting through their delegates to so provide,
that instrument which is the expression of
their sovereignty however limited, has JUDICIAL REVIEW LIMITED TO ACTUAL
establishedarepublicangovernmentintended LITIGATION; WISDOM, JUSTICE OR
tooperateandfunctionasaharmoniouswhole, EXPEDIENCY OF LEGISLATION.Even
under a system of checks and balances, and then,thispowerofjudicialreviewislimitedto
subject to specific limitations and restrictions actualcasesandcantroversiestobeexercised
provided in the said instrument. The after full opportunity of argument by the
Constitution sets forth in no uncertain parties, and limited further to the
languagetherestrictionsandlimitationsupon
constitutional question raised or the verylis
governmental powers and agencies. If these
restrictionsandlimitationsaretranscended,it motapresented. Any attempt at abstraction
wouldbeinconceivableiftheConstitutionhad could only lead to dialectics and barren legal
not provided for a mechanism by which to questions and to sterile conclusions unrelated
direct the course of government along to actualities. Narrowed as its function is in
constitutional channels, for, then, the thismanner,thejudiciarydoesnotpassupon
distributionofpowerswouldbemereverbiage, questions of wisdom, justice or expediency of
thebillofrightsmereexpressionsofsentiment, legislation. More than that, courts accord the
and the principles of good government mere presumption of constitutionality to legislative
political apothegms. Certainly, thelimitations enactmentsnotonlybecausetheLegislatureis
and restrictions embodied in the Constitution presumedtoabidebytheConstitutionbutalso
are real as they should be in any living because the judiciary in the determination of
constitution. In the United States where no actualcasesandcontroversiesmustreflectthe
wisdomandjusticeofthepeopleasexpressed
throughtheirrepresentativesintheexecutive Same;Same;To constitute a violation of
andlegislativedepartmentsofthegovernment. P.D.9,thetwoelementsofcarryingbladedor
pointedweaponsoutsideonesresidenceandof
carryingsuchaweaponinfurtheranceof,orto
abet,orinconnectionwithsubversion,lawless
V. AIDS TO CONSTRUCTION
violence,chaosandthelikemustbepresent.
1. GENERALLY
We hold that theoffence carries two elements:
Ebarlevs.Sucaldito first,thecarryingoutsideonesresidenceofany
Statutes;Construction:ExecutiveOrderNo.264 bladed,blunt,orpointedweapon,etc.notused
as a necessary tool or implement for a
makes reference to "erring officials and
livelihood;andsecond,thattheactofcarrying
employees x x x removed or otherwise theweaponwaseitherinfurtheranceof,orto
vindicated"anddoesnotemploysuchtechnical abet, or in connection with subversion,
terms as "accused,""convicted" and rebellion, insurrection, lawless violence,
"acquitted,"henceitwasnotintendedtoapply criminality,chaos,orpublicdisorder.Itisthe
to criminal prosecutions.It is moreover second element which removes the act of
significant that the Executive Order in carryingadeadlyweapon,ifconcealed,outside
question makes specific reference to "erring ofthescopeofthestatuteorthecityordinance
officials or employees x x x removed or mentionedabove.Inotherwords,asimpleact
otherwise vindicated." If it were intended to ofcarryinganyoftheweaponsdescribedinthe
apply to criminal prosecutions, it would have presidentialdecreeisnotacriminaloffensein
employed such technical terms as "accused," itself. What makes the act criminal or
"convicted," or "acquitted." While this is not punishableunderthedecreeisthemotivation
necessarily a controlling parameter for all behindit.Withoutthatmotivation,theactfalls
cases, it is here material in construing the within the purview of the city ordinance or
intentofthemeasure. some statute when the circumstances so
warrant.
Same;It becomes a judicial task to
Peoplevs.Purisima
interpret the meaning and scope of a statute
Statutory Construction;Criminal when an ambiguity in its implementation
Law;LocalGovernments;P.D.9didnotrepeal presentsitself.Thatthereisambiguityinthe
by implication Act No. 1780 and City presidential decree is manifest from the
OrdinanceNo.3820,asamendedbyOrdinance conflicting views which arise from its
No.3928ofManilawhichpunishthecarrying, implementation. When ambiguity exists,it
concealed in ones body, of bladed or other becomes a judicial taskto construe and
interpret the true meaning and scope of the
deadly weapons.We do not agree with
measure, guided by the basic principle that
petitioner that the abovementioned statute
penalstatutesaretobeconstruedandapplied
andthecityordinancearedeemedrepealedby
liberally in favor of the accused and strictly
P.D. 9 (3). P.D. 9 (3) does not contain any
against the state. In the construction or
repealing clause or provision, and repeal by
interpretation of a legislative measurea
implicationisnotfavored.Thisprincipleholds
presidentialdecreeinthesecasestheprimary
true with greater force with regards to penal
ruleistosearchforanddeterminetheintent
statutes which as a rule are to be construed
strictlyagainstthestateandliberallyinfavor and spirit of the law.Legislative intent is the
of the accused. In fact, Article 7 of the New controllingfactor,forinthewordsofthisCourt
CivilCodeprovidesthatlawsarerepealedonly inHidalgov.Hidalgo,perMr.JusticeClaudio
bysubsequentonesandtheirviolationornon Teehankee, whatever is withinthespirit of a
observance shall not be excused bydisuse, or statuteiswithinthestatute,andthishastobe
customorpracticetothecontrary. soifstrictadherencetotheletterwouldresult
inabsurdity,injusticeandcontradictions.

modification could mean no less than the
Commissioner of lnternal Revenue vs. elimination of the three months of arresto
TMXSales,Inc. mayor and the reduction of the indemnity to
theoffendedparty,MayorArsenioLacson,from
Taxation;Statutory Construction;Interpretatio
P10,000.00 to P5,000.00. All the rest of the
talisinambiguissemperfriendaest,utevitatur
punishment remains including the subsidiary
inconveniens et absurdum;Where there is imprisonment in case of insolvency. Had the
ambiguity, such interpretation as will avoid Courtwantedtodoawaywiththesubsidiary
inconvenienceandabsurdityistobeadopted. imprisonmentincaseofinsolvencyofaccused
Section292(nowSection230)oftheNational appellantstopaythefineandtheindemnityit
InternalRevenueCodeshouldbeinterpretedin wouldhavesoexpresslyprovided.
relationtotheotherprovisionsoftheTaxCode
Judgments;Same;Effectofuseofacommaina
inordertogiveeffecttolegislativeintentand
toavoidanapplicationofthelawwhichmay sentence of conviction for libel regarding
lead to inconvenience and absurdity. In the liabilityforsubsidiaryimprisonmentincaseof
caseofPeoplevs.Rivera(59Phil.236[1933]), nonpayment of civil indemnity and fine.A
thisCourtstatedthatstatutesshouldreceivea carefulscrutinyofthedecisionofthetrialcourt
sensibleconstruction,suchaswillgiveeffectto reveals that the clause with subsidiary
thelegislativeintentionandsoastoavoidan imprisonment in case of insolvency is
unjust or an absurd conclusion. separated by a comma from the preceding
INTERPRETATIO TALIS IN AMBIGUIS clauseisherebysentencedtothreemonthsof
SEMPER FRIENDA EST, UT EVITATUR arresto mayor with the accessory penalties of
INCONVENIENS ET ABSURDUM. Where thelaw,topayafineoffivehundredpesos,to
thereisambiguity,suchinterpretationaswill indemnify the offended party, Mayor Arsenio
avoid inconvenience and absurdity is to be Lacson, in the sum of Ten Thousand Pesos
adopted.Furthermore,courts mustgiveeffect (P10,000.00)pesos.Theuseofacommainthe
to the general legislative intent that can be partofthesentenceistomakethesubsidiary
discovered from or is unraveled by the four imprisonment in case of insolvency refer not
cornersofthestatute,andinordertodiscover onlytononpaymentoftheindemnity,butalso
saidintent,thewholestatute,andnotonlya tononpaymentofthefine.
particular provision thereof, should be
considered. (Manila Lodge No. 761, et al. vs.
Hidalgovs.Hidalgo
CourtofAppeals,etal.,73SCRA162[1976])
Everysection,provisionorclauseofthestatute Statutory construction;Spirit or intent must
mustbeexpoundedbyreferencetoeachother prevail over Utter of the law.Wherethe true
inordertoarriveattheeffectcontemplatedby intentofthelawisclearsuchintentorspirit
thelegislature. must prevail over the letter thereof, for
whatever is within the spirit of a statute is
withinthestatute,sinceadherencetotheletter
Peoplevs.Subido
would result in absurdity, injustice and
Judgments;Statutoryconstruction;Meaningof contradictionsandwoulddefeattheplainand
sentence in Court of Appeals decision, to wit vitalpurposeofthestatute.
WHEREUPON, with the modifications above
indicated, the appealed judgment is hereby 2. LEGISLATIVE HISTORY
affirmed at appellants costs is that it covers
Song Kiat Chocolate Factory vs. Central
onlythosemattersspecificallyreferredtointhe BankofthePhil.,etal
dispositiveportionofitsdecision.ToUsitis
TAXATION;FOREIGN EXCHANGE
clearthatwhentheCourtofAppealsprovided
TAX;EXEMPTION OF CHOCOLATE FROM
in the concluding portion of its decision:
TAXATION, CONSTRUED.The exemption
WHEREUPON,withthemodificationsabove
fromtaxationprovidedinSection2ofRepublic
indicated, the appealed judgment is hereby
Act No. 601 refers to "chocolate" as a
affirmed at appellants costs the alluded
manufacturedorfinished product. It doesnot Same;Interpretation of Laws;A statute
include cocoabeans".
"
granting powers to an agency created by the
STATUTES;INTERPRETATIONOFLAWSis Constitution should be liberally construed for
FOR THE COURTS.The interpretation of theadvancementofthepurposesandobjectives
lawsisforthecourts.Thecourtsarenotbound forwhichitwascreated.ThepurposeofR.A.
by one legislator's opinion, expressed in No. 6770 is to give the Ombudsman such
Congressional debates, concerning the powers as he may need to perform efficiently
applicationofexistinglaws. thetaskcommittedtohimbytheConstitution.
Suchbeingthecase,saidstatute,particularly
itsprovisionsdealingwithprocedure,shouldbe
Buenasedavs.Flavier
given such interpretation that will effectuate
Statutory Construction;Noscitor a thepurposesandobjectivesoftheConstitution.
Sociis;Where a particular word is equally Anyinterpretationthatwillhamperthework
susceptible of various meanings, its correct of the Ombudsman should be avoided. A
statute granting powers to an agency created
construction may be made specific by
by the Constitution should be liberally
consideringthecompanyoftermsinwhichitis construedfortheadvancementofthepurposes
foundorwithwhichitisassociated.Whenthe and objectives for which it was created (Cf.
Constitution vested on the Ombudsman the Department of Public Utilities v. Arkansas
power to recommend the suspension of a LouisianaGas.Co.,200Ark.983,142S.W.(2d)
public official or employees (Sec. 13 [3]), it 213 [1940]; Wallace v. Feehan, 206 Ind. 522,
referredtosuspension,asapunitivemeasure. 190N.E.438[1934]).
All the words associated with the word
suspension in said provision referred to Peoplevs.Yadao,etal
penaltiesinadministrativecases,e.g.removal,
demotion, fine, censure. Under the rule CRIMINAL PROCEDURE;INFORMATION,
ALLEGATIONS IN SECTION 1 OF
ofNoscitor a sociis,the word suspension
REPUBLIC ACT NO. 145 CONSTRUED.
should be given the same sense as the other
Wheretheinformationdoesnotaverthatthe
words with which it is associated. Where a
defendants assisted or were assisting the
particular word is equally susceptible of
claimant for veterans benefits but merely
variousmeanings,itscorrectconstructionmay
offered to assist, the facts charged did not
bemadespecificbyconsideringthecompanyof
constitute a public offense. Section 1 of
termsinwhichitisfoundorwithwhichitis
Republic Act No. 145 punishes a person
associated(CoKimChanv.ValdezTanKeh,75
assistingaclaimantwhosolicits,contractsfor,
Phil.371[1945];Caltex(Phils.)Inc.v.Palomar,
charges or receives or attempts tosolicit etc.,
18SCRA247[1966]).
morethanispermittedbylaw.Apersonwho
Same;Interpretation of Laws;Penal offers to assist but does not assist, is not
statutesarestrictlyconstruedwhileprocedural includedwithinthepenalprohibition.
statutesareliberallyconstrued.Penalstatutes
arestrictlyconstruedwhileproceduralstatutes
are liberally construed (Crawford. Statutory
Construction,InterpretationofLaws,pp.460
461; Lacson v. Romero, 92 Phil. 456 [1953]).
Thetestindeterminingifastatuteispenalis
whether a penalty is imposed for the 3. CONTEMPORARY CONSTRUCTION
punishmentofawrongtothepublicorforthe Nestl Philippines, Inc. vs. Court of
redressofaninjurytoanindividual(59Corpuz Appeals
Juris, Sec. 658; Crawford, Statutory
Construction,pp.496497).ACodeprescribing StatutoryConstruction;Interpretationgivenby
theprocedureincriminalcasesisnotapenal administrativeagencyentitledtogreatrespect.
statute and is to be interpreted liberally It is a principle too well established to
(Peoplev.Adler,140N.Y.331;35N.E.644). require extensive documentation that the

construction given to a statute by an implement said statute should be given
administrative agency charged with the greatweightbythecourts,nevertheless,if
interpretationandapplicationofthatstatuteis suchconstructioniserroneous orisclearly11
entitledtogreatrespectandshouldbeaccorded showntobeinconflictwiththegoverning
great weight by the courts, unless such
statute or the Commission or other
construction is clearly shown to be in sharp
laws, thesamemustbedeclarednulland
12
conflict with the governing statute or the

Constitutionandotherlaws.xxx.Therationale void.ItistheroleoftheJudiciarytorefine
forthisrulerelatesnotonlytotheemergence and,whennecessary,correctconstitutional
of the multifarious needs of a modern or (and/or statutory) interpretation, in the
modernizing society and the establishment of context of the interactions of the three
diverseadministrativeagenciesforaddressing branchesofthegovernment. 13
and satisfying those needs; it also relates to

accumulation of experience and growth of Adasavs.Abalos
specialized capabilities by the administrative
Statutory Construction;The all toofamiliar
agencychargedwithimplementingaparticular
statute. ruleinstatutoryconstruction,inthiscase,an
administrativeruleofprocedure,isthatwhena
statute or rule is clear and unambiguous,
interpretationneednotberesortedto.Theall
Philippine Scout Veterans Security & toofamiliar rule in statutory construction, in
Investigation Agency, Inc. vs. National thiscase,anadministrativeruleofprocedure,
LaborRelationsCommission is that when a statute or rule is clear and
unambiguous, interpretation need not be
It is axiomatic that retirement laws are resorted to. Since Section 7 of the subject
liberallyconstruedandadministeredinfavorof circular clearly and categorically directs the
the person intended to be benefited.It has DOJtodismissoutrightanappealorapetition
beenheldthat(i)tisaxiomaticthatretirement forreviewfiledafterarraignment,noresortto
lawsareliberallyconstruedandadministered interpretationisnecessary.
infavorofthepersonsintendedtobebenefited.
Alldoubtsastotheintentofthelawshouldbe
resolved in favor of the retiree to achieve its 4. STATUTORY DIRECTIVES
humanitarian purposes. The intention is to Valderrama vs. National Labor Relations
provide for the retirees sustenance and Commission
hopefullyevencomfort,whenhenolongerhas
thestaminatocontinueearninghislivelihood. Judgments;Therulethatonceajudgment
becomes final it can no longer be disturbed,
Itisaruleofstatutoryconstructionthat
altered,ormodifiedisnotaninflexibleoneasit
allstatutesaretobeconstruedashaving
admits of exceptions, as where facts and
only a prospective operation unless the
circumstances transpire after a judgment had
purposeandintentionoftheLegislatureto
givethemaretrospectiveeffectisexpressly become final and executory which render its
declaredorisnecessarilyimpliedfromthe executionimpossibleorunjust.Therulethat
languageused.Ineverycaseofdoubt,the onceajudgmentbecomesfinalitcannolonger
be disturbed, altered, or modified is not an
doubt must be resolved against the
inflexibleone.Itadmitsofexceptions,aswhere
retrospectiveeffect. 9
facts and circumstances transpire after a

The fact that respondent Commission judgment has become final and executory
had a prior ruling in a similar which render its execution impossible or
case granting retirement benefits is of no
10
unjust.Insuchacasethemodificationofthe
moment.Althoughitmaybetruethatthe decisionmaybesoughtbytheinterestedparty
contemporaneousconstructionofastatute and the court will modify and alter the
byexecutiveofficerstaskedtoenforceand

judgmenttoharmonizeitwithjusticeandthe applicable only in order to effectuate the
facts. objectivesoftheLaborCodeandnottodefeat
them.ThepertinentprovisionsoftheRevised
Same;Labor Law;To get the true intent RulesofCourtofthePhilippinesandprevailing
andmeaningofadecision,nospecificportion jurisprudencemaybeappliedbyanalogyorin
asuppletorycharactertoeffectanexpeditious
thereofshouldberesortedtobutsamemustbe
resolutionoflaborcontroversiesinapractical
consideredinitsentirety.Inthecaseatbar,
and convenient manner. We are inclined to
modification of the judgment is appropriate
overlookaproceduraldefectifonlytopromote
considering that the company is no longer in
substantialjustice.
operationandthereisnoshowingthatithas
filed bankruptcyproceedingsinwhichprivate The rule that the NLRC may disregard
respondentmightfileaclaimandpursueher technicalrulesofprocedureinordertogivelife
remedy under Article 110 of the Labor Code. totheconstitutionalmandatefortheprotection
Holding petitioner personally liable for the
of labor is well settled.General rules of
judgment in this case is eminently just and
procedure are merely suppletory in character
proper considering that, although the
visvis labor disputes which are primarily
dispositive portion of the decision mentions
governed by labor laws. Furthermore, as
only the respondent company, the text
providedinArt.4oftheLaborCode,alldoubts
repeatedlymentionsrespondentsinassessing
in the implementation and interpretation of
liability for the illegal dismissal of private
thiscode,includingitsimplementingrulesand
respondent. For indeed petitioner and others
regulationsshallberenderedinfavoroflabor.
were respondents below and there can be no
The rule that the NLRC may disregard
doubt of their personal liability. The mere
technicalrulesofprocedureinordertogivelife
happenstance that only the company is
totheconstitutionalmandatefortheprotection
mentionedshouldnot,therefore,beallowedto
oflaboriswellsettled.
obscurethefactthatinthetextofthedecision
petitioner and her corespondents below were
found guilty of having illegally dismissed VI. INTERPRETATION OF WORDS AND
private respondents and of claiming that PHRASES
private respondents employment was
1. GENERAL AND PARTICULAR USES OF
terminatedbecauseofretrenchment,whenthe WORDS
truth was that she was dismissed for
Matuguina Integrated Wood Products, Inc.
pregnancy. Hence they should be held
personally liable for private respondents vs.CourtofAppeals
reinstatement with backwages. Indeed it is Statutory Construction; When the
well said that to get the true intent and
interpretationofastatuteaccordingtotheexact
meaning of a decision, no specific portion
and literal import of its words would lead to
thereofshouldberesortedtobutsamemustbe
consideredinitsentirety. absurdity,itshouldbeconstruedaccordingto
Technicalities have no room in labor cases, thespiritandreason,disregardingifnecessary
wheretheRulesofCourtareapplicableonlyin theletterofthelaw.Invariably,itisnotthe
letter,butthespiritofthelawandintentofthe
order to effectuate the objectives of the Labor
legislature that is important. When the
Codeandnottodefeatthem.Wehavealready
interpretation of a statute according to the
explainedthattherewasreallynoamendment
exactandliteralimportofitswordswouldlead
ofthedecisionbutonlyaclarification.Buteven
toabsurdity,itshouldbeconstruedaccording
ifappealwasrequiredinordertocorrectthe
to the spirit and reason, disregarding if
error, in the interest of substantial justice,
necessarytheletterofthelaw.
especiallyincasesinvolvingrightsofworkers,
Same;Statutes;P.D.705;WordsandPhrases;
the procedural lapse in this case may be
The term obligations as used in the final
disregarded. As held inGeneral Baptist Bible
clauseofthesecondparagraphofSection61of
Collegev.NLRC:Technicalitieshavenoroom
in labor cases, where the Rules of Court are P.D.705isconstruedtomeanthoseobligations

incurred by the transferor in the ordinary paper or other finished wood products. This
course of business, not to include those simplymeansthatlumberisaprocessedlogor
obligations or liabilities incurred by the processed forest raw material. Clearly, the
transferor as a result of transgressions of the Code uses the termlumberin its ordinary or
commonusage.Inthe1993copyrighteditionof
law, as these are personal obligations of the
Websters Third New International
transferor.In construing statutes, the terms
Dictionary,lumberis defined,inter alia,as
used therein are generally to be given their
timber or logs after being prepared for the
ordinarymeaning,thatis,suchmeaningwhich
is ascribed to them when they are commonly market.Simplyput,lumberisaprocessedlog
used,totheendthatabsurdityinthelawmust or timber. It is settled that in theabsence of
be avoided. The term obligations as used in legislative intent to the contrary, words and
the final clause of the second paragraph of phrasesusedinastatuteshouldbegiventheir
Section 61 of P.D. 705 is construed to mean plain, ordinary and common usage meaning.
thoseobligationsincurredbythetransferorin Andinsofaraspossessionoftimberwithoutthe
the ordinary course of business. It cannot be requiredlegaldocumentsisconcerned,Section
construed to mean those obligations or 68 of P.D. No. 705, as amended, makes no
liabilitiesincurredbythetransferorasaresult distinction between raw or processed timber.
of transgressions of the law, as these are Neitherdowe.Ubilexnondistinguitnecnos
personal obligations of the transferor, and distinguiredebemos.
could not have been included in the term
obligationsabsentanymodifyingprovisionto
thateffect. Bernardo,etal.vs.Bernardo,etal.
EMMINENT DOMAIN;"BONA FIDE"
Tanvs.People OCCUPANT HAS PREFERENTIAL RIGHT
Natural Resources;Forestry Reform TO BUY LANDS; MERE LICENSEE OF
LESSEEisNOT"BONAFIDE"OCCUPANT.
Code;Words and Phrases;Statutory
Anypersonwho,atthetimeoftheacquisition
Construction;Lumber is included in the term
of the estate by the Government, has been
timber; It is settled that in the absence of gratuitously occupying a lot therein by mere
legislative intent to the contrary, words and toleranceof its lessee, andwhodoes not own
phrasesusedinastatuteshouldbegiventheir the house erected on such lot, is not a"bona
plain,ordinaryandcommonusagemeaning. fideoccupant,"entitledtoitsacquisition,asthe
The question of whether lumber is excluded termisusedinCommonwealthActNo.539.
fromthecoverageofSection68ofPD705,as
ESSENCE OF TERM "BONA FIDE."The
amended,hasbeensettledinMustangLumber,
essenceofbonafideorgoodfaithliesinhonest
Inc. vs. Court of Appeals,in which this Court beliefinthevalidityofone'sright,ignoranceof
expresslyruledthatlumberisincludedinthe a superior claim, and absence of intention to
termtimber.We quote at length the Courts overreachanother.
discussion: The Revised Forestry Code
contains no definition of
eithertimberorlumber.While the former is Malanyaonvs.Lising
included inforest productsas defined in StatutoryConstruction,Interpretation;Anti
paragraph(q)ofSection3,thelatterisfoundin Graft and Corrupt Practices Act;Meaning of
paragraph (aa) of the same section in the
the word ''acquitted" in Sec. 13 of the
definition of Processing plant, which reads:
Act;Payment of municipal funds for the
(aa)Processingplantisanymechanicalsetup,
machine or combination of machine used for salariesofasuspendedmayorwhodiedduring
the processing of logs and other forest raw his incumbency is illegal; Dismissal does not
materials intolumber,veneer, plywood, amount to acquittal.It is obvious that when
wallboard, blackboard, paper board, pulp, the statute speaks of the suspended officer

being "acquitted" it means that after due
hearing and consideration of the evidence
againsthimthecourtisoftheopinionthathis
guilt has not been proved beyond reasonable
doubt. Dismissal of the case against the
suspended officer will not suffice because
dismissal doesnot amount to acquittal. x x x
Findingthepetitiontobewelltaken,thesame
is hereby granted, the order of the courta
quois hereby set aside and another one is
entered declaring illegal the payment of
municipal funds for the salaries of the late
Mayor S.B. Pontanal during his suspension
from office and ordering the respondent
treasurertoretrievepaymentssofardisbursed.
Same;Same;Nature of claim for back
salaries.Foranotherthingtheclaimforback
salaries is neither a criminal nor a civil
liability. It is in fact a right provided the
conditionsofthelawarepresent.

Statcon Escra Ruling MIDTERMS

Hochgeladen von

Dokumentinformationen

Copyright

Verfügbare Formate

Dieses Dokument teilen

Dokument teilen oder einbetten

Freigabeoptionen

Stufen Sie dieses Dokument als nützlich ein?

Sind diese Inhalte unangemessen?

Copyright:

Verfügbare Formate

Statcon Escra Ruling MIDTERMS

Hochgeladen von

Copyright:

Verfügbare Formate

I.

INTERPRETATION OF THE CONSTITUTION thedeductionofthewithholdingtaxfromthe

1 STATCON REVIEWER [ESCRA] Compiled By: Rheyne Robledo

Underthe1987Constitution,theclearand Integrated Bar of the Philippines vs.

4 STATCON REVIEWER [ESCRA] Compiled By: Rheyne Robledo

5 STATCON REVIEWER [ESCRA] Compiled By: Rheyne Robledo

7 STATCON REVIEWER [ESCRA] Compiled By: Rheyne Robledo

8 STATCON REVIEWER [ESCRA] Compiled By: Rheyne Robledo

9 STATCON REVIEWER [ESCRA] Compiled By: Rheyne Robledo

this rule applies to all pertinent questions,

12 STATCON REVIEWER [ESCRA] Compiled By: Rheyne Robledo

IV. STATUTORY CONSTRUCTION Statutoryinterpretation;Sales;Thetermsale

14 STATCON REVIEWER [ESCRA] Compiled By: Rheyne Robledo

16 STATCON REVIEWER [ESCRA] Compiled By: Rheyne Robledo

18 STATCON REVIEWER [ESCRA] Compiled By: Rheyne Robledo

conflict with the governing statute or the

and satisfying those needs; it also relates to

facts and circumstances transpire after a

19 STATCON REVIEWER [ESCRA] Compiled By: Rheyne Robledo

20 STATCON REVIEWER [ESCRA] Compiled By: Rheyne Robledo

21 STATCON REVIEWER [ESCRA] Compiled By: Rheyne Robledo

22 STATCON REVIEWER [ESCRA] Compiled By: Rheyne Robledo

Das könnte Ihnen auch gefallen