Verba Legis - Plain Meaning Rule

 Verba legis – plain meaning rule
-Where the statute is clear, plain, and free from ambiguity, it must be given its literal meaning and applied
without interpretation (Republic vs Lacap)
 Verba legis non est recedendum – from the words of a statute there should be no departure (Republic vs
Lacap)
 Intrinsic aids- found in the printed page of the statute itself
 Extrinsic aids – extraneous facts and circumstances outside the printed page ex. Legislative history of a
statute. Legislative debates, views, deliberations – views expressed by the legislators are not controlling
 Amendment by deletion of certain words or phrases in a statute – indicates that the legislature intended
to change the meaning of the statute, for the presumption is that the legislature would not have made the
deletion had the intention been not to effect a change in its meaning – should accordingly be given a
construction different from that previous to amendment (Topacio Nueno vs Angeles)
 Adopted statutes - Foreign statutes which are adopted in this country or from which local laws are
patterned form part of the legislative history of the latter (US vs Guzman). The general rule is that where
local statutes are patterned after or copied from those of another country, the decisions of the courts in
such country construing those laws are entitled to great weight in the interpretation of such local statutes
and will generally be followed if found reasonable and in harmony with justice, public policy and other local
statutes in the subject (Wise and CO vs Meer) (Cu vs Republic)
o Limitations of rule – when foreign construction is clearly erroneous or has not become settled,
or where the adopting state has given its own interpretation
 Contemporary Construction – construction placed upon the statute by an executive or administrative
officer called upon to execute or administer such statute. These interpretations are in the form of rules and
regulations, circulars, directives, opinions and rulings (Phil Sugar Central Agency vs Collector of Customs)
o Three Types of executive interpretations of the law:
 Construction by an executive or administrative officer directly called to implement the
law.
 Construction by the Secretary of Justice in his capacity as the chief legal adviser of the
government
 Interpretation handed down in an adversary proceeding in the form of a ruling by an
executive officer exercising quasi-judicial power.
 Optimus interpres rerumm usus – the best interpreter of the law is usage
 Stare decisis - The decision of the Supreme Court applying or interpreting a statute is controlling with
respect to the interpretation of that statute. An obiter dictum does not fall within the doctrine
Chapter IV – A. Literal Interpretation

 Verbal egis
 Dura lex sed lex
B. Departure from Literal Interpretation
 Statute must be capable of interpretation, otherwise inoperative.
o Santiago vs Comelec – the Court adopted a strict and literal rather than a liberal construction of
the law, which is not in keeping with the maxim, interpretation fienda est ut res magis valeat
quam pereat
o interpretation fienda est ut res magis valeat quam pereat
 A law should be interpreted with a view to upholding rather than destroying it.
One portion of a statute should not be construed to destroy the other. A
construction that would render a provision inoperative or ineffective should be
avoided. The provisions should be harmonized and reconciled if possible; they
should be construed together as means to effect the purpose of the law.
 What is within the spirit is within the law.
o The spirit or intention of a statute prevails over the letter thereof, and what is within the spirit of a
statute is within the statute although it is not within the letter thereof, while that which is within
the letter but not within the spirit of the statute is not within the statute (Tanada vs Cuenco)
o Ratio legis – interpretation according to spirit or reason of the law
 Literal import must yield to intent
 Cessante ratione legis, cessat et ipsa lex
o When the reason of the law ceases, the law itself ceases.
o A subsequent statute may render a prior law devoid of reason. In such a case, the later law will
operate to repeal the prior law, even though the two laws contain no conflicting provisions
 Supplying legislative omission
o The court may supply the omission to make the statute conform to the obvious intent of the
legislature or to prevent the act from being absurd (Lamb vs Phipps)
o May only correct clearly clerical errors or obvious mistakes, omissions, and misprints
 Construction as to avoid absurdity
o Paras vs Comelec – recall election must be approved as it would be absurd to maintain that SK
elections must be deemed regular elections as the provision for recall elections would then
become moot
 Construction in favor of right and justice
o People vs Purisima – unlawful carrying outside of residence any bladed, pointed, or blunt
weapon… - when the PD was promulgated there was no intention to work a hardship or an
oppressive result – it may be a tool for extortion what with the terrifying risk of being
imprisoned for 5 to ten years for a rusted knife or a pair of scissors
o Salvacion vs Central Bank
 Article 10 of the Civil Code – in case of doubt in the interpretation or application of
laws, it is presumed that the lawmaking body intended right and justice to prevail –over
the strict and literal words of the statute
 Law does not require the impossible
o Nemo tenetur ad impossible – the law obliges no one to perform an impossibility
o Impossibilium nulla obligatio est – there is no obligation to do an impossible thing
o A statute may not be so construed as to require compliance with what it prescribes cannot, at
the time, be legally accomplished. It should instead be construed in such a way that substantial
compliance with what the law requires is sufficient.
o Santos vs PNOC Exploration Corp - Laws and rules must be interpreted in a way that they are in
accordance with logic, common sense, reason and practicality.
 Number and gender of words
C. Implications
 Doctrine of Necessary Implication
o What is implied in a statute is as much a part thereof as that which is expressed. Every statute is
understood, by implication, to contain all such provisions as may be necessary to effectuate its
object and purpose, or to make effective, rights, powers, privileges or jurisdiction which it
grants, including all such collateral and subsidiary consequences as may be fairly and logically
inferred from its terms.
o Ex necessitate legis- by necessary implication of law
o Deemed to include all incidental power, right or privilege because the greater includes the
lesser in eo quod plus sit, semper inest et minus
 Grant of power includes incidental power
o Where a general power in conferred or duty enjoined, every particular power necessary for the
exercise of one or the performance of the other is also conferred.
 What cannot be done directly cannot be done indirectly
o What the law prohibits cannot, in some other way, be legally accomplishd.
o Quando aliquid prohibetur ex directo, prohibetur et per obliquum
Interpretation of Words and Phrases

 In General
o Estrada vs Sandiganbayan
Preliminarily, the whole gamut of legal concepts pertaining to the validity of legislation is predicated on the
basic principle that a legislative measure is presumed to be in harmony with the Constitution. [3] Courts
invariably train their sights on this fundamental rule whenever a legislative act is under a constitutional attack,
for it is the postulate of constitutional adjudication. This strong predilection for constitutionality takes its
bearings on the idea that it is forbidden for one branch of the government to encroach upon the duties and
powers of another. Thus it has been said that the presumption is based on the deference the judicial branch
accords to its coordinate branch - the legislature.
If there is any reasonable basis upon which the legislation may firmly rest, the courts must assume that the
legislature is ever conscious of the borders and edges of its plenary powers, and has passed the law with full
knowledge of the facts and for the purpose of promoting what is right and advancing the welfare of the
majority. Hence in determining whether the acts of the legislature are in tune with the fundamental law, courts
should proceed with judicial restraint and act with caution and forbearance. Every intendment of the law must
be adjudged by the courts in favor of its constitutionality, invalidity being a measure of last resort. In construing
therefore the provisions of a statute, courts must first ascertain whether an interpretation is fairly possible to
sidestep the question of constitutionality.
In La Union Credit Cooperative, Inc. v. Yaranon [4] we held that as
long as there is some basis for the decision of the court, the constitutionality of the challenged law will not be
touched and the case will be decided on other available grounds. Yet the force of the presumption is not
sufficient to catapult a fundamentally deficient law into the safe environs of constitutionality. Of course, where
the law clearly and palpably transgresses the hallowed domain of the organic law, it must be struck down on
sight lest the positive commands of the fundamental law be unduly eroded.
Verily, the onerous task of rebutting the presumption weighs heavily on the party challenging the validity of
the statute. He must demonstrate beyond any tinge of doubt that there is indeed an infringement of the
constitution, for absent such a showing, there can be no finding of unconstitutionality. A doubt, even if well-
founded, will hardly suffice. As tersely put by Justice Malcolm,"To doubt is to sustain."
 General Rules on Interpretation
o Words construed in their ordinary sense – plain, ordinary, and common usage meaning
 Where the law does not distinguish, courts should not distinguish
o Ubi lex non distinguit, nec nos distinguere debemus
o Republic vs Yahon- It is basic in statutory construction that in case of irreconcilable conflict between
two laws, the later enactment must prevail, being the more recent expression of legislative
will. Statutes must be so construed and harmonized with other statutes as to form a uniform system
17
of jurisprudence. However, if several laws cannot be harmonized, the earlier statute must yield to the
later enactment. The later law is the latest expression of the legislative will.
 Disjunctive and Conjunctive Words
 Noscitur a sociis
o Where a particular word or phrase is ambiguous in itself or is equally susceptible of various
meanings, its correct construction may be made clear and specific by considering the
company of words in which it is found or with which it is associated
o Carandang vs Santiago – physical injuries term SC: should be understood to mean bodily harm
or injury as defamation and fraud where used in their original sense, thus, physical injuries
must be used in its generic sense as well
 Ejusdem generis
o Where a general word or phrase follows an enumeration of particular and specific words of
the same class or where the latter follow the former, the general word or phrase is to be
construed to include, or to be restricted to, persons, things or cases akin to, resembling, or of
the same kind or class as those specifically mentioned
o Limitations:
 The statute must contain an enumeration of particular and specific words, followed by
a general word or phrase
 All items must belong in one specific class
 Does not apply if words are exhaustive – embrace all persons or objects
 Specific words must not be for example of the general one
 There is no indication of legislative intent to give the general words or phrases a
broader meaning
 Expression unius est exclusion alterius and cassus omissus
 Redendo singular singulis
 Provisos, exceptions and saving clauses

Verba Legis - Plain Meaning Rule

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Verba Legis - Plain Meaning Rule

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Verba Legis - Plain Meaning Rule

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

 Verba legis – plain meaning rule

Chapter IV – A. Literal Interpretation

Interpretation of Words and Phrases

 Redendo singular singulis

 Provisos, exceptions and saving clauses

You might also like