Construction

The art or process of discovering and expounding the meaning and intention of the authors of law, where that
intention is rendered doubtful by reason of the ambiguity in its language or the fact that the given case is not
explicitly provided for in the law.
Purpose: to ascertain and give effect to the intent of the law, to determine legislative intent.

Rules of Statutory Construction

These are tools used to ascertain legislative intent. They are not rules but mere axioms of experience.

Legislative Intent
The essence of the law. The intent of the legislature is the law, and the key to, and the controlling factor in, its
construction and interpretation.
The primary source of legislative intent is the statute itself.

Where the words or phrases of a statute are not obscure or ambiguous, its meaning and the intention of the
legislature must be determined from the language employed.

Legislative Purpose
The reason why a particular statute was enacted by the legislature.

Legislative Meaning
What the law, by its language, means: what it comprehends, what it covers or embraces, what it limits or confines.

In construing a statute, it is not enough to ascertain the intention or meaning of the statute; it is also necessary to
see whether the intention or meaning has been expressed in such a way as to give it legal effect and validity.

The duty and power to interpret or construe a statute or the Constitution belongs to the judiciary.
The SC construes the applicable law in controversies which are ripe for judicial resolution.
The court does not interpret law in a vacuum.
The legislature has no power to overrule the interpretation or construction of a statute or the Constitution by the
Supreme Court, for interpretation is a judicial function assigned to the latter by the fundamental law.
The SC may, in an appropriate case, change or overrule its previous construction.

A condition sine qua non before the court may construe or interpret a statute, is that there be doubt or ambiguity
in its language. The province of construction lies wholly within the domain of ambiguity. Where there is no
ambiguity in the words of a statute, there is no room for construction.

A statute is ambiguous when it is capable of being understood by reasonably well-informed persons in either of two
senses.
Where the law is free from ambiguity, the court may not introduce exceptions or conditions where none is provided.
A meaning that does not appear nor is intended or reflected in the very language of the statute cannot be placed
therein be construction.
Where the two statutes that apply to a particular case, that which was specifically designed for the said case must
prevail over the other.
When the SC has laid down a principle of law as applicable to a certain state of facts, it will adhere to that principle
and apply it to all future cases where the facts are substantially the same.
Judicial rulings have no retroactive effect.
The court may issue guidelines in applying the statute, not to enlarge or restrict it but to clearly delineate what the
law requires. This is not judicial legislation but an act to define what the law is.

Limitations on power to construe

Courts may not enlarge nor restrict statutes.
Courts may not be influenced by questions of wisdom.
AIDS TO CONSTRUCTION
To ascertain the true intent of the statute, the court may avail of intrinsic aids, or those found in the printed page
of the statute, and extrinsic aids, those extraneous facts and circumstances outside the printed page.

Title
The title may indicate the legislative extent or restrict the scope of the law, and a statute couched in a language of
doubtful import will be construed to conform to the legislative intent as disclosed in its title.
When the text of the statute is clear and free form doubt, it is improper to resort to its title to make it obscure.

Preamble
That part of the statute written immediately after its title, which states the purpose, reason or justification for the
enactment of a law. It is usually expressed in the form of whereas clauses.
It is not an essential part of the statute. But it may, when the statute is ambiguous, be resorted to clarify the
ambiguity, as a key to open the minds of the lawmakers as to the purpose of the statute.

Context of the whole text

The best source from which to ascertain the legislative intent is the statute itself the words, the phrases, the
sentences, sections, clauses, provisions taken as a whole and in relation to one another.

Punctuation marks
Punctuation marks are aids of low degree; they are not parts of the statute nor the English language.
Where there is, however, an ambiguity in a statute which may be partially or wholly solved by a punctuation mark, it
may be considered in the construction of a statute.

Capitalization of letters
An aid of low degree in the construction of statutes.

Headnotes or epigraphs
These are convenient index to the contents of the provisions of a statute; they may be consulted in case of doubt in
interpretation.
They are not entitled to much weight.

Lingual text
Unless otherwise provided, where a statute is officially promulgated in English and Spanish, the English text shall
govern, but in case of ambiguity, omission or mistake, the Spanish may be consulted to explain the English text.
The language in which a statute is written prevails over its translation.

Intent or spirit of law

Legislative intent or spirit is the controlling factor, the influence most dominant if a statute needs construction.
The intent of the law is that which is expressed in the words thereof, discovered in the four corners of the law and
aided if necessary by its legislative history.

Policy of law
A statute of doubtful meaning must be given a construction that will promote public policy.

Purpose of law or mischief to be suppressed

The purpose or object of the law or the mischief intended to be suppressed are important factors to be considered in
its construction.

Dictionaries
While definitions given by lexicographers are not binding, courts have adopted, in proper cases, such definitions to
support their conclusion as to the meaning of the particular words used in a statute.

Consequences of various constructions

Construction of a statute should be rejected if it will cause injustice, result in absurdity or defeat the legislative
intent.

Presumptions
Based on logic, common sense; eg. Presumption of constitutionality, completeness, prospective application, right
and justice, etc.

LEGISLATIVE HISTORY
Where a statute is susceptible of several interpretations, there is no better means of ascertaining the will and
intention of the legislature than that which is afforded by the history of the statute. The history of a statute refers
to all its antecedents from its inception until its enactment into law.

Presidents message to the legislature

This usually contains proposed legislative measures and indicates the Presidents thinking on the proposed
legislation which, when enacted into law, follows his line of thinking into the matter.

Explanatory note
A short exposition of explanation accompanying a proposed legislation by its author or proponent. It contains
statements of the reason or purpose of the bill, as well as arguments advanced by its author in urging its passage.

Legislative debates, views and deliberations

Where there is doubt as to what a provision of a statute means, that meaning which was put to the provision during
the legislative deliberation or discussion on the bill may be adopted.

Reports of commissions
In construing the provisions of the code as thus enacted, courts may properly refer to the reports of the commission
that drafted the code in aid of clarifying ambiguities therein.

Prior laws from which the statute is based

Legislative history will clarify the intent of the law or shed light on the meaning and scope of the codified or revised
statute.

Change in phraseology by amendments

Courts may investigate the history of the provisions to ascertain legislative intent as to the meaning and scope of the
amended law.

Amendment by deletion
The amendment statute should be given a construction different from that previous to its amendment.

Adopted statutes
Where local statutes are patterned after or copied from those of another country, the decisions of courts in such
country construing those laws are entitled to great weight in the interpretation of such local statutes.

Principles of common law

Courts may properly resort to common law principles in construing doubtful provisions of a statute, particularly
where such a statute is modeled upon Anglo-American precedents.

Conditions at the time of the enactment

It is proper, in the interpretation of a statute, to consider the physical conditions of the country and the circumstances
then obtaining which must of necessity affect its operation in order to understand the intent of the statute.

History of the times

The history of the times out of which the law grew and to which it may be rationally supposed to bear some direct
relationship.
CONTEMPORARY CONSTRUCTION
The constructions placed upon statutes at the time of, or after, their enactment by the executive, legislature or
judicial authorities, as well as those who, because of their involvement in the process of legislation, are
knowledgeable of the intent and purpose of the law, such as draftsmen and bill sponsors.
The contemporary construction is the strongest in law.

Construction by an executive or administrative officer directly called to implement the law

May be express interpretation embodied in a circular, directive or regulation.
May be implied a practice or mode of enforcement of not applying the statute to certain situations or of applying it
in a particular manner; interpretation by usage or practice.

Construction by the Sec. of Justice as his capacity as the chief legal adviser of the government
In the form of opinions issued upon request of administrative or executive officials who enforce the law.
President or Executive Secretary has the power to modify or alter or reverse the construction given by a department
secretary.

Interpretation handed down in an adversary proceeding in the form of a ruling by an executive officer exercising
quasi-judicial power
Such rulings need not have the detachment of a judicial, or semi-judicial decision, and may properly carry basis.

The contemporaneous construction is very probably the true expression of the legislative purpose, especially if the
construction is followed for a considerable period of time. It is thus entitled to great weight and respect by the
courts in the interpretation of the ambiguous provisions of law, and unless it is shown to be clearly erroneous, it
will control the interpretation of statutes by the courts.
The best interpreter of law is usage.
Interpretation by those charged with their enforcement is entitled to great weight by the courts.
Contemporaneous construction is entitled to great weight because it comes from a particular branch of government
called upon to implement the laws thus construed.
Respect is due the government agency or officials charged with the implementation of the law for their competence,
expertness, experience and informed judgment, and the fact that they are frequently the drafters of the law they
interpret.

The court may disregard contemporaneous construction when there is no ambiguity in the law, where the
construction is clearly erroneous, where strong reason to the contrary exists, and where the court has previously
given the statute a different interpretation.
If through the misapprehension of the law an executive or administrative officer called upon to implement it has
erroneously applied and executed it, the error may be corrected when the true construction is ascertained.
Erroneous contemporaneous construction creates no vested right on the part of those who relied upon, and followed
such construction. The rule is not absolute and admits exceptions in the interest of justice and fair play.

Legislative interpretation
Legislative interpretation of a statute is not controlling, but the courts may resort to it to clarify ambiguity in the
language thereof.

Legislative approval
The legislature is presumed to have full knowledge of a contemporaneous or practical construction of a statute.
Legislative ratification is equivalent to a mandate.

Reenactment
The most common act of legislative approval; the reenactment of a statute, previously given a contemporaneous
construction, is a persuasive indication of the adaptation by the legislature of the prior construction.

Stare Decisis
The decision of the SC applying or interpreting a statute is controlling with respect to the interpretation of that
statute and is of greater weight than that of an executive or administrative officer in the construction of other statutes
of similar import.
Past decisions of the court must be followed in the adjudication of cases: Stare decisis et non quieta movere, one
should follow past precedents and should not disturb what has been settled.
Where the court resolved a question merely sub silencio, its decision does not come within the maxim of stare
decisis
Nor does an opinion expressed by the way, not up to the point in the issue, fall within the maxim; it is merely
an obiter dictum
An obiter dictum is an opinion expressed by a court upon some question of law which is not necessary to the
decision of the case before it. It is a remark, by the way; it is not binding as a precedent.
The rule of stare decisis is not absolute. If found contrary to law, it must be abandoned.

LITERAL INTERPRETATION
If a statute is clear, plain and free from ambiguity, it must be given its literal meaning and applied without
attempted interpretation. Verba legis non est recedendum, from the words of a statute there should be no
departure.

Dura lex sed lex

The law is harsh, but it is still the law. It must be applied regardless of who may be affected, even if it may be harsh
or onerous.
When the language of the law is clear, no explanation of it is required.

DEPARTURE FROM LITERAL INTERPRETATION

Statutes must be capable of construction or interpretation. If no judicial certainty can be had as to its meaning, the
court is not at liberty to supply nor to make one.

What is within the spirit is within the law

When what the legislature had in mind is not accurately reflected in the language of the statute, resort is had to the
principle that the spirit of the law controls its letter. Ratio legis, interpretation according to the spirit of the law.

Literal import must yield to intent

The intention of the legislature and its purpose or object controls the interpretation of particular language of a
statute.
Words ought to be more subservient to the intent and not the intent to the words.

Construction to accomplish purpose

Statutes should be construed in the light of the object to be achieved and the evil or mischief to be suppressed, and
they should be given construction as will advance the object, suppress the mischief, and secure the benefits intended.

When reason of law ceases, law itself ceases

Reason for the law is the heart of the law. When the reason of the law ceases, the law itself ceases. The reason of the
law is its soul.

Supplying legislative omission

Where a literal import of the language of the statute shows that words have been omitted that should have been in
the statute in order to carry out its intent and spirit, clearly ascertainable from its context, the courts may supply the
omission to make the statute conform to the obvious intent of the legislature or to prevent the act from being absurd.

Correcting clerical errors

In order to carry out the intent of the legislature, the court may correct clerical errors, which, uncorrected, would
render the statute meaningless.

Construction to avoid absurdity

Courts are not to give a statute a meaning that would lead to absurdities. Where there is ambiguity, such
interpretation as will avoid inconvenience and absurdity is to be adopted.
Constructing to avoid injustice
Presumed that undesirable consequences were never intended as a legislative measure; that interpretation is to be
adopted which is free from evil or injustice.

Construction to avoid danger to public interest

Where great inconvenience will result, or great public interest will be endangered or sacrificed, or great mischief
done, from a particular construction of the statute, such construction should be avoided.

Construction in favor of right and justice

In case of doubt in the interpretation and application of the law, it is presumed that the lawmaking body intended
right and justice to prevail.
The fact that the statute is silent, obscure or insufficient with respect to a question before a court will not justify the
latter from declining judgment. That one is perceived to tip the scales which the court believes will best promote the
public welfare in its probable operation.

Surplusage and superfluity disregarded

The statute should be construed in accordance with the evident intent of the legislature without regard to the rejected
word, phrase or clause.

Redundant words may be rejected

While the general rule is that every effort should be made to give some meaning to every part of the statute, there is
no obligation to give every redundant word or phrase a special significance, contrary to the manifest intention of the
legislature.

Obscure or missing words or false description may not preclude construction

Neither does false description neither preclude construction nor vitiate the meaning of a statute which is otherwise
unclear.

Exemption from rigid application of the law

Every rule is not without an exception. Where rigorous application may lead to injustice, the general rule should
yield to occasional exceptions.

Law does not require the impossible

The law obliges no one to perform an impossible thing.

Number and gender

When the context of the statute indicates, words in plural include the singular, vice versa.
The masculine but not the feminine includes all genders, unless the context indicates otherwise.

IMPLICATIONS
No statute can be enacted that can provide all the details involved in its application. What is implied in a statute is
as much a part thereof as that which is expressed.

Grant of jurisdiction
The jurisdiction to hear and decide cases is conferred only by the Constitution or by statute. The grant of
jurisdiction to try actions carries with it all necessary and incidental powers to employ all writs, processes and
other means essential to make its jurisdiction effective.

Grant of power includes incidental power

Where a general power is conferred or duty enjoined, every particular power necessary for the exercise of one of
the performance of the other is also conferred.
Grant of power excludes greater power
The foregoing principle implies the exclusion of those which are greater than conferred.

What is implied should not be against the law

The statutory grant of power does not include such incidental power which cannot be exercised without violating
the Constitution, the statute granting power, or other laws of the same subject.

Authority to charge against public funds may not be implied

Unless a statute expressly so authorizes, no claim against public finds may be allowed.

Illegality of act implied from prohibition

Where a statute prohibits the doing of an act, the act done in violation thereof is by implication null and void. No
man can be allowed to found a claim upon his own wrongdoing or inequity. No man should be allowed to take
advantage of his own wrong. In Pari Delicto

Exceptions to In Pari Delicto

It will not apply when its enforcement or application will violate an avowed fundamental policy or public interest
When the transaction is not illegal per se but merely prohibited, and the prohibition by law is designed for the
protection of one party

What cannot be done directly cannot be done indirectly

What the law prohibits cannot, in some other way, be legally accomplished.

There should be no penalty for compliance with law

A person who complies with a statute cannot, by implication, be penalized by it