Based on the book, Statutory Construction by Ruben E.

Agpalo

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.

1. 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.

1. 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.

1. 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.

1. 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.

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

1. 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.

1. 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.

1. 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.

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

1. 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.

1. 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.

1. Consequences of various constructions

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

1. 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.

1. President’s message to the legislature

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

1. 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.
1. 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.

1. 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.

1. 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.

1. 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.

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

1. 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.

1. 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.

1. 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.

1. 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.

1. 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.
1. 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.

1. 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 anobiter dictum
o 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.
o 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

1. When the context of the statute indicates, words in plural include the singular, vice versa.
2. 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

1. It will not apply when its enforcement or application will violate an avowed fundamental policy
or public interest
2. 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