EXTRINSIC AIDS

1. Contemporaneous circumstances
2. Policy
3. Legislative history of the statute
4. Contemporaneous and practical
construction
5. Executive construction
6. Legislative construction
7. Judicial construction
8. Construction by the bar and legal
commentators
Association of landowners vs. Secretary of
Agriculture
(Power of eminent domain; compensation
less than money)

(Did Estrada resign?)

Aldovino vs. COMELEC
(Preventive suspension is not an
interruption of service)
Socrates vs. COMELEC
(tapos na yung three term nagpahinga at
tumakbo ulit)
Termination of Employment
Twin requirements of Due Process
1. Dismissal under Article 282 of the
Labor Code
(a)

Serious misconduct or willful

disobedience by the employee of
the lawful orders of his employer
or representative in connection
with his work;

(b)

Gross and habitual neglect by the

employee of his duties;

(c)

Fraud or willful breach by the

employee of the trust reposed in
him by his employer or duly
authorized representative;

(d)

Commission of a crime or offense

by the employee against the
person of his employer or any
immediate member of his family or
his
duly
authorized
representatives; and

(e)

Other causes analogous to the

foregoing.

Bonifacio vs. Dizon

(When can ejectment of agricultural
lessee authorized)
Pascual vs. Provincial Board
(Doctrine of Condonation)
Note: This was already abandoned in the
case of Morales as Ombudsman vs. Binay
Garcia-Padilla vs. Enrile
(Rebellion; where arrest is lawful;
historical basis power to suspend writ of
habeas corpus; reversion to Barcelon and
Montenegro cases; protean; 1987
Constitution)
Halili vs. Court of Appeals
(Can aliens acquire lands in the
Philippines? Krivenko vs. Register of
Deeds)
Osmena and Garcia
(History of electoral reforms package; ban
on political advertisement during
elections; dissent of J. Panganiban and
Romero)
Arroyo vs. De Venecia
(Mr. Speaker)
Estrada vs. Desierto

2. Employee must be accorded due

process (notice and hearing)
Under the so-called WENPHIL
DOCTRINE if the services of the employee
was terminated due to a just or
authorized cause but the affected
employees right to due process has been
violated, the dismissal is legal but the

employee is entitled to damages by way of

indemnification for the violation of the
right.
SERRANO vs. ISETANN et. al.
abandoned the WENPHIL DOCTRINE and
ruled that if the employee is dismissed
under just or authorized cause but the
affected employees right to due process
has been violated, his dismissal becomes
ineffectual. Therefore, the employee is
entitled to backwages from the time he
was dismissed until the determination of
the justness of the cause of the dismissal.
AGABON vs. NLRC (Nov. 17,
2004) abandoned the Serrano doctrine
and REINSTATED THE WENPHIL
DOCTRINE. The sanctions, however must
be stiffer than that imposed in Wenphil.
Presumption in Aids of Construction
1. Presumption of validity
2. Presumption of constitutionality
3. Presumption of good faith
4. Presumption against injustice
5. Presumption against inconsistency
(ubi lex non distinguit, nec nos
distinguere debemos [when the law
does not distinguish, we should not
distinguish])
6. Presumption absurdity
7. Presumption against absurdity
8. Presumption against ineffectiveness
9. Presumption against irrepealable laws
(De Guia vs. Guingona)
10. Presumption against implied repeals

Article 7, NCC: Laws are repealed

only by subsequent ones, and
their violation or non-observance
shall not be excused by disuse, or
custom or practice to the contrary.
Repeal: Express (there is repealing
clause) or Implied (no repealing
clause, but prior and subsequent
law are irreconcilable)
11. Presumption against violation of
public policy
12. Presumption of knowledge of existing
laws
13. Presumption of acquiescence to
judicial construction
14. Presumption of jurisdiction
15. Presumption of acting within the
scope of authority
16. Presumption against violation of
international law

CHAPTER III
Law
(Sanchez Roman)
Classification of law
Natural vs. Positive
Public vs. Private
Sources of law
Legislation
Precedent
Custom (Article 12, NCC)
Court decision