STATCON

1. Generalia specialibus non derogant

- "general things do not derogate from specific things". It's often used in legal interpretation to clarify
that when there's a conflict between a general law and a specific law, the specific law takes precedence.

Special provision or special statutes it reflects the legislative intent of legislative department that’s why
special statutes or provision prevail over general one. It doesn’t matter who came first as long as there’s
a doubt special law will prevail but there’s a exception:

◦ General law prevail over special law when it treats the subject in particular and special
law refers to it in general

◦ General law prevails over special law when the legislature intended the general
enactment to cover the whole subject and to repeal all prior laws inconsistent their with.

2. Pari Materia Rule

All statutes relating to the same subject or having the same general purpose should be read and
construed together as if they constituted one law.

There are more than one statutes that cover same subject or topic, if this happened they have to be
construed as if there is only one law. The two statutes should harmonized together for the intent of the
legislatures to take effect. How ever there’s a two qualification:

◦ First, if two or more statutes in the same subject were enacted during different times
and under different conditions, the interpretation should be in accordance with the circumstances or
conditions peculiars to each. It should not be read as one but it should be read as how it enact or what is
the interpretation at that time.

◦ A statute will not be construed as a repealing prior acts on the same subject unless the
new law is evidently intended to all prior laws on the matter. If there are two statutes, the new statues
should not be look as a repealing statues of the first statutes it means that if two statutes can stand
together and if they can harmonized each other then those two statutes should remain valid.

3. Construction of – penal, remedial, substantive, labor, tax, mandatory.

 ◦ TAX STATUTE- in case of doubt the tax statue should be strictly against the state and
liberally in favor of tax payers, because it burdens the citizens. CRI vs. Fireman’s find insurance company
“in case of doubts statutes levy in taxes and duties are to be construed most strongly against the
government and in favor of the subject or citizens because burdens are not to be imposed nor presumed
to be imposed beyond what statutes expressly and clearly import”

-TAX EXEMPTION should be construed strictly against the tax payers and in favor of the government

◦ MANDATORY STATUTES-this statutes that contains word of command or of prohibition,

and non compliance with the same renders that proceedings that are illegal and void

-it is considered as mandatory when the word in the statutes consist of command like “shall, shall not,
must” and non compliance that renders the proceedings or any acts to which it relate to illegal and void.

-DIRECTORY STATUTES is not mandatory but rather directory in nature, used the word “may” but the
one directing that to other has their own discretion to follow or not.

-but in the case of diokno the Supreme Court states that although the word “shall” was used it is
directory because it still needs the discretion

◦ LABOR LAWS- it should be construed in favor of the employee or laborer because

according to Supreme Court the employer and employee do not stand in equal footing.

◦ REMEDIAL LAW- it should be construed liberally, the rules of court states that “this rules
shall be liberally construed in order to promote objective and to assist the parties in obtaining just,
speedy and inexpensive determination of every action and proceedings”

◦ SUBSTANTIVE STATUTE- shall be construed

4. Prospective and Retroactive statutes

◦ Classification of statues in can be prospective and retroactive statutes

◦ Prospective statutes apply only to future action or cases, a new law has been mandated
it is only effective today and the cases from the past is not affected

◦ When can a law apply retroactively

1. If it is remedial in nature

2. Penal statutes If it is favorable to the accused provided that the accused is not a habitual
delinquent
 3. If the law itself specifically provides that it should be applied retroactive in nature
(example article 256 of family code)

4. When it is curative statutes that correct errors or irregularities in existing laws to make
attempted acts valid and effective. Clerical error in naturez

5. Those law that involves public interest

5. Repeal and amendments of statutes

◦ Repeal means to annul or revoke an existing law or statute, rendering it no longer in

force. Repeal can occur through explicit legislative action or by implication.

Types of Repeal:

1. Express Repeal:

The legislature explicitly declares that a law or statute is repealed.

2.Implied Repeal:

Occurs when a new law is inconsistent with or contradicts an existing law, making it impossible for both
to coexist.

2. Amendment refers to changes or modifications made to an existing law. Amendments

can either alter specific provisions or add new provisions to adapt the law to changing circumstances.

◦ Types of Amendment:

1. Substitution:

Replaces an existing provision with a new one.

Example: Replacing the rate of taxation in a tax statute.

2. Insertion:

Adds new provisions without replacing existing ones.

Example: Introducing a new section to address emerging technology under existing cybercrime laws.

3. Deletion:

Removes specific provisions from a statute.

Example: Deleting outdated or redundant clauses.

Latin maxim

1. Importance

◦ D

2. Mens legislatores

◦ Mens legislatoris is a Latin term that means "the intention of the lawmaker." It refers to
the purpose or goal that a lawmaker had in mind when creating a law.

3. Reddendo singular singulis

◦ Reddendo Singula Singulis is a Latin term meaning "referring each to each". In statutory
interpretation, it refers to a rule of construction whereby words and phrases are read in context and
matched to the words or phrases they modify or refer to.

4. Cassus omissus pro omisso habbendus est

◦ that means that a case omitted is to be held as intentionally omitted.

◦ It is a rule of statutory construction. If a person, object, or thing omitted from an

enumeration in a statute, must be held to have been omitted intentionally.

5. Noscitur a sociis

◦ Noscitur a sociis is a Latin term that means "it is known by its associates." It is a rule of
constructionthat suggests that the meaning of an unclear word or phrase should be determined by the
words immediatelysurrounding it.
 ◦ This rule is often used in legal and statutory interpretation to help determine the
meaning of unclear language. It is based on the idea that words are often influenced by the words
around them, and that the context in which a word is used can help clarity its meaning.

6. Ejusdem generic

◦ “of the same kind.”

◦ The statutoryand constitutional construction principle of “ejusdem generis” states that

where general words or phrases follow a number of specific words or phrases, the general words are
specifically construed as limited and apply only to persons or things of the same kind or class as those
expressly mentioned. For example, if a law refers to automobiles, trucks, tractors, motorcycles, and
other motor-powered vehicles, a court might use ejusdem generis to hold that such vehicles would not
include airplanes, because the list included only land-based transportation.

The Best Evidence Rule comes into play when a reproduction of the original or oral evidence is offered
to prove the contents of a document. "The purpose of the rule requiring the production of the best
evidence is the prevention of fraud, because if a party is in possession of [the best] evidence and
withholds it, and seeks to substitute inferior evidence in its place, the presumption naturally arises that
the better evidence is withheld for fraudulent purposes which its production would expose and defeat."
Asuncion v. National Labor Relations Commission, 414 Phil. 329, 339 (2001).

The CA, however, refused to look beyond the literal wording of the documents and rejected any other
evidence that could shed light on the actual intention of the contracting parties. Though the CA cited the
Best Evidence Rule, it appears that what it actually applied was the Parol Evidence Rule instead

The Parol Evidence Rule excludes parol or extrinsic evidence by which a party seeks to contradict, vary,
add to or subtract from the terms of a valid agreement or instrument. Thus, it appears that what the CA
actually applied in its assailed Decision when it refused to look beyond the words of the contracts was
the Parol Evidence Rule, not the Best Evidence Rule. The appellate court gave primacy to the literal
terms of the two contracts and refused to admit any other evidence that would contradict such terms

Based on the foregoing, the resolution of the instant case necessitates an examination of the parties’
respective parol evidence, in order to determine the true intent of the parties. Well-settled is the rule
that in case of doubt, it is the intention of the contracting parties that prevails, for the intention is the
soul of a contract,45 not its wording which is prone to mistakes, inadequacies, or ambiguities. To hold
otherwise would give life, validity, and precedence to mere typographical errors and defeat the very
purpose of agreemen
While the Best Evidence Rule ensures the presentation of the most reliable form of evidence, the Parol
Evidence Rule protects the integrity of written agreements by limiting external evidence. Both rules aim
to maintain fairness and reliability in legal proceedings but address different evidentiary issues.