Statutes conferring power

- Statutes which confer upon a public body or officer power to perform acts
which concern the pubic interests or rights of individuals, are generally
regarded as mandatory although the language used is permissive only since
such statutes are construed as imposing rather than conferring privileges.

- The power is given not for the benefit of the public officer but for that of 3rd
person.

Statutes granting benefits

- Statutes which require certain steps to be taken or certain conditions to be

met before persons concerned can avail of the benefits conferred by law are,
with respect to such requirements, considered mandatory.

- The rule is based on the maxim vigilantibus et non dormientibus jura

subveniunt or the laws aid the vigilant, not those who slumber on their rights

. - Potior est in tempoe, potior est in jure- he who is first in time is

preferred in right.

Statutes prescribing jurisdictional requirements

- The general rule is that statutory requirements by which courts or tribunals

acquire jurisdiction to hear and decide particular actions must be strictly
complied with before the courts or tribunals can have authority to proceed.

- Hence, statutes prescribing the various steps and methods to be taken for
acquisition by the courts or tribunals over certain matters are considered
mandatory.

Statutes prescribing time to take action or to appeal

- Statutes or rules prescribing the time for litigants to take certain actions or to
appeal from an adverse decision is generally mandatory.

- Such statutes or rules have been held as absolutely indispensable to the

prevention of needless delays and to the orderly and speedy discharge of
business and are a necessary incident to the proper, efficient, and orderly
discharge of judicial functions.

- Such statutes or rules require strict, not substantial, compliance.

Accordingly, they are not waivable, nor can they be the subject of agreements
or stipulations by litigants.

SAMPLE; (from book)

For instance section 187 or RA 7160 requires that the dissatisfied taxpayer
who questions the validity or legality of a tax ordinance must file his appeal to
the secretary of justice , within 30 days from effectivity thereof.

In case the secretary decides the appeal, a period of 30 days is allowed for an
aggrieved party to go to court. But if secretary does not act thereon, after the
lapse of 60 days, a party could already proceed to seek relief in court.

These three seperate periods are clearly given for compliance as a

prerequisite before seeking redress in a competent court.

For this reason the courts may construe these provisions of statutes as
mandatory. - essential to enable appelate court to take cognizance of the
appeal

Unless the requirements of law are complied with, the decision of the law court
will become final and preclude the appellate court from acquiring jurisdiction to
review it.
INTEREST REIPUBLICAI UT SIT FINIS LITIUM- public interest requires that
by the very nature of things there must be an end to a legal controversy.

CASE(from agpalo)
Gachon v Devera, Jr.
The issue is whether sec. 6 of the rule on summary procedure reads; “should
the defendant fail to answer the complaint within the period above
provided, the court, motu proprio, or on motion of the plaintiff, shall render
judgement as may be warranted by the facts alleged in the complaint and
limited to what is prayed for therein,’” is mandatory or directory, such that an
answer filed out of time may be accepted.

In holding that the provision is mandatory, the Court explained:

The rule frowns upon delays and prohibits altogether the filing of motions for
extension of time. Consistent with this reasoning is sec of the rule which allows
the trial court to render judgement, even motu proprio, upon the faiure of a
defendant to file an answer within the reglementary period.

Indeed, the judiciary Reorganization act of 1980, mandating the promulgation

of the rule on summary procedure, authorized the court to stipulate that the
period for filing pleadings in cases covered by the rules on summary procedure
shall be non-extensible.