WRITTEN REPORT:

LIMITATIONS OF RULE.

Expressio unius est exclusion alterius

- It is not a rule of law, but merely a tool in statutory

construction or a means of ascertaining the legislative intent
- It is not if universal application. Like other rules of statutory construction, it cannot
defeat the plainly indicated purpose of the legislature.
- Expressio unius est exclusion alterius, no more than auxiliary rule of
interpretation to be ignored where other circumstances indicate that the
enumeration was not intended to be exclusive.
- Does not apply where enumeration is by way of example or to remove doubts
only.

Gomez v. Ventura

- Issue: whether the prescription by a physician of opium for a patient whose

physical condition did not require the use of such drug constitutes
“unprofessional conduct” as to justify revocation of physician’s license to practice
- Held: LIABLE. Rule of expressio unius NOT applicable
- Court said, it cannot be seriously contended that aside from the five examples
specified, there can be no other conduct of a physician deemed
‘unprofessional.’ Nor can it be convincingly argued that the legislature intended
to wipe out all other forms of ‘unprofessional’ conduct therefore deemed grounds
for revocation of licenses

Expressio unius est exclusion alterius

- Does not apply when in case a statute appears upon its face to limit the
operation of its provision to particular persons or things enumerating them, but no
reason exists why other persons or things not so enumerated should not have
been included and manifest injustice will follow by not including them.

- If it will result in incongruities or a violation of the equal protection clause of

the Constitution.

- If adherence thereto would cause inconvenience, hardship and injury to the

public interest.

San Pablo Manufacturing Corp. v Commissioner of Internal Revenue

- Issue: whether petitioner’s goods were exempt from tax.

- Held: No.
- Section 168 of the 1987 Tax Code was clear. The tax exemption applied only to
the exportation of rope, coconut oil, palm oil, copra by-products and dessicated
coconuts, whether in their original state or as an ingredient or part of any
manufactured article or products, by the proprietor or operator of the factory or by
the miller himself.
- Expressio unius est exclusion alterius
 - Anything that is not included in the enumeration is excluded therefrom and a
meaning that does not appear nor is intended or reflected in the very language of
the statute cannot be placed therein.
- To allow SPCM’s claim for tax exemption will violate the established principles
and unduly derogate sovereign authority.

Where expression, etc., is not applicable

- Coconut Oil Refiners Assn., Inc. v Torres

- Ruled that Expressio unius est exclusion alterius is NOT applicable where
words are used by example only.
- “tax and duty-free importations of raw materials, capital and equipment” was
cited as an example of incentives that may be given to entities operating within
the zone.
- The legal maxim should be applied only as a means of discovering legislative
intent which is not otherwise manifest, and should not be permitted to defeat the
plainly indicated purpose of the legislature.

DOCTRINE OF CASUS OMISSUS

- casus omissus pro omisso habendus est

- A person, object or thing omitted from an enumeration must be held to have been
omitted intentionally.
- The maxim operates only if and when the omission has been clearly established,
and in such a case what is omitted in the enumeration may not, by construction,
be included therein.
- Exception: where legislature did not intend to exclude the person, thing or object
from the enumeration. If such legislative intent is clearly indicated, the court may
supply the omission if to do so will carry out the clear intent of the legislature and
will not do violence to its language

DOTRINE OF LAST ANTECEDENT

- Qualifying words restrict or modify only the words or phrases to which they are
immediately associated not those which are distantly or remotely located.
- Ad proximum antecedens fiat relatio nisi impediatur sententia – relative
words refer to the nearest antecedents, unless the context otherwise requires
- Rule: use of a comma to separate an antecedent from the rest exerts a dominant
influence in the application of the doctrine of last antecedent.
-

ILLUSTRATION OF RULE

Pangilinan v. Alvendia

- Members of the family of the tenant includes the tenant’s son, son-in-law, or
grandson, even though they are not dependent upon him for support and living
separately from him BECAUSE the qualifying phrase “who are dependent upon
him for support” refers solely to its last antecedent, namely, “such other person or
persons, whether related to the tenant or not”
Florentino v. PNB

- Issue: whether holders of backpay certificates can compel government-owned

banks to accept said certificates in payment of the holder’s obligations to the
bank.

- Statute: “obligations subsisting at the time of the approval of this amendatory act
for which the applicant may directly be liable to the government or to any of its
branches or instrumentalities, or to corporations owned or controlled by the
government, or to any citizens of the Philippines or to any association or
corporation organized under the laws of the Philippines, who may be wiling to
accept the same for such settlement”

- Held: the court, invoking the doctrine of last antecedent, ruled that the phrase
qualify only to its last antecedent namely “any citizen of the Philippines or
association or corporation organized under the laws of the Philippines”

- The court held that backpay certificate holders can compel government-owned
banks to accept said certificates for payment of their obligations with the bank.

QUALIFICATION OF THE DOCTRINE

- Subject to the exception that where the intention of the law is 
 to apply the
phrase to all antecedents embraced in the 
 provision, the same should be made
extensive to the whole.

- Doctrine does not apply where the intention is not to qualify 
 the antecedent at
all.

REDDENDO SINGULA SINGULIS

- Variation of the doctrine of last antecedent

- Referring each to each;

- Referring each phrase or expression to its appropriate object, 
 or let each be put
in its proper place, that is, the word should be taken distributively.

Peo. v Tamani

- Issue: when to count the 15-day period within which to appeal a judgment of
conviction of criminal action—date of promulgation of judgment or date of receipt of
notice of judgment.

- Statute: Sec. 6, Rule 122 of the Rules of Court

- Held: Should be from ‘promulgation’ should be referring to 
 ‘judgment,’ while notice

refer to order.
King v. Hernandez

- Issue: Whether a Chinese holding a noncontrol position in a retail establishment,

comes within the prohibition against aliens intervening “in the management,
operation, administration or control” followed by the phrase “whether as an officer,
employee or laborer...

- Held: Following the principle, the entire scope of personnel activity, including that of
laborers, is covered by the prohibition against the employment of aliens.

Amadora v. CA

- Issue: whether Art 2180 of Civil Code, which states that “lastly teachers or heads
of establishments of arts and trade shall be liable for damages caused by their
pupils and students or apprentices so long as they remain in their custody”
applies to all schools, academic as well as non- academic

- Held: teachers pupils and students; heads of establishments of arts and trades
to apprentices

- General rule: responsibility for the tort committed by the student will attach to the
teacher in charge of such student (where school is academic)

- Exception: responsibility for the tort committed by the student will attach to the
head, and only he, (who) shall be held liable (in case of the establishments of
arts and trades; technical or vocational in nature)

C. PROVISOS, EXCEPTIONS AND SAVING CLAUSES

PROVISOS, GENERALLY

- to limit the application of the enacting clause, section or 
 provision of a statute,

or except something, or to qualify or restrain its generality, or exclude some
possible ground of misinterpretation of it, as extending to cases not intended by
legislature to be brought within its purview.

- Rule: restrain or qualify the generality of the enacting clause or section which it
refers.

- Purpose: limit or restrict the general language or operation of the statute, not to
enlarge it.

- Location: commonly found at the end of a statute, or provision & introduced, as

a rule, by the word “Provided”.

- Determined by: What determines whether a clause is a proviso is its substance

rather than its form. If it performs any of the functions of a proviso, then it will be
 regarded as such, irrespective of what word or phrase is used to introduce it.

PROVISO MAY ENLARGE SCOPRE OF LAW

- It is still the duty of the courts to ascertain the legislative 
 intention and it prevails
over proviso.

- Thus it may enlarge, than restrict

US V. SANTO NINO

- Statute: it shall be unlawful for any person to carry concealed about his person
any bowie, knife, dagger, kris or any other deadly weapon: Provided, that this
provision shall not apply to firearms in the possession of persons who have
secured a license therefore or who are entitled to same under provisions of this
Act. 


- Held: through the Proviso it manifested the intention to include in the prohibition
weapons other than armas blancas as specified.