LESSON PLAN. Objectives: At the end of the lesson, the students must be able to: 1. Define Statutory Construction: Distinguish the difference between judicial legislation and statutory construction; Determine how legislative intent must be ascertained; . Cite Cases that best illustrate the concept presented; and . Discuss and understand the maxim for the day: “Ratio legis est anima”. 2. 3. 4, 5. STATUTORY CONSTRUCTION DEFINED Statutory Construction - the art or process of discovering and expounding the meaning ‘and intention of the authors of the law with respect to its application to a given case, where that intention is rendered doubtful, among others, by reason of the fact that the given case is not explicitly provided for in the law. Justice Martin defines statutory construction as the art of seeking the intention of the legislature in enacting a statute and applying it to a given state of facts. Ajudicial function is required when a statute is invoked, and different interpretations are in contention Difference between judicial legislation and statutory construction: Where legislature attempts to do several things one which is invalid, it may be discarded if the remainder of the act is workable and in no way depends upon the invalid portion, but if that portion is an integral part of the act, and its excision changes the manifest intent of the act by broadening its scope to include subject matter or territory which was not included therein as enacted, such excision is “judicial legislation” and not “statutory construction” Caltex vs Palomar, G.R. No. 1-19650, September 29, 1966 Construction-the art or process of discovering and expounding the meaning and intention of the authors of the law with respect to its application to a given case, there the intention is rendered doubtful, amongst others, by reason of the fact that the given case is not explicitly provided for in the law (Black, Interpretation of Laws) -look beyond the fair exterior, to the substance, in order to unmask the real element and pernicious tendencies which the law is seeking to prevent ("El Debate", Inc. vs Topacio) -every case must be resolved upon the particular phraseology of the applicable statutory provision -the term under a construction should be accorded no other meaning than that which is consistent with the nature of the word associated therewith -declaratory relief is available to any person “whose rights are affected by a statute...to determine any question of construction or validity arising under the...tatute and for a declaration of his rights thereunder (Section 1, Rule 64, Revised Rules of Court) Conditions sine qua non 1. There must be a justiciable controversy 2. The controversy must be between persons whose interests are adverse 3. The party seeking declaratory relief must have a legal interest in the controversy ‘and 4, The issue involved must be ripe for judicial determination (Tolentino vs The Board of Accountancy, et al., G.R. No. L-3062, September 28, 1951) Judicial decisions applying or interpreting the law shall form a part of the legal system (Article 8, Civil Code of the Philippines) Judicial decisions assume the same authority as the stature itself and, until authoritatively abandoned, necessarily become, to the extent that they are applicable, the criteria which must control the actuations not only of those called upon to abide thereby but also of those bound to enforce obedience thereto. Statutory Construction vs Judicial Legislation When is it construction and when is it judicial legislation? To declare what the law shall be is a legislative power, but to declare what the law is ‘or has been, is judicial, However, the court “do and must legislate" to fill in the gaps in the law. The Court decided to go beyond merely ruling on the facts of the existing law and jurisprudence. (Floresca v. Philex Mining; Republic v. CA and Molina) 1. Floresca v. Philex Mining Does CFI (RTC) have jurisdiction over the complaint? Pursuant to Article 9 of the Civil Code which provides that: “No judge or court shall decline to render judgment by reason of the silence, obscurity or insufficiency of the laws." It argues that the application or interpretation placed by the Court upon a law is part of the law as of the date of the enactment of the said law since the Court's application or interpretation merely establishes the contemporaneous legislative intent that the construed law purports to camry into effect. Yet, the Court argues that the Court can legislate, pursuant to Article 9 of the New Civil Code. However, even the legislator himself recognizes that in certain instances, the court “do and must legislate” to fill in the gaps in the law; because the mind of the legislator, like all human beings, is finite and therefore cannot envisage all possible cases to which the law may apply. 2. Republic v. CA and Molina Guidelines presented by the court. The Family Code of the Philippines provides an entirely new ground (in addition to those enumerated in the Civil Code) to assail the validity of a marriage, namely, “psychological incapacity." In addition to resolving the present case, the court finds the need to lay down specific guidelines in the interpretation and application of Article 36 of the Family Code. In the present case, it appears to that there is a“difficulty,” if not outright 'refusat’ or "negiect' in the performance of some marital obligations of the respondent spouse. Mere showing of “iteconcilable differences’ and contlicting personalities" in no wise constitutes psychological incapacity. Hence, the Court decided to go beyond merely ruling on the facts of this case vis-a-vis existing law and jurisprudence. For psychological incapacity to foster, three characteristics should manifest, that include gravity, juridical antecedence and incurabilty. 8. How must legislative intent be ascertained? Legislative intent must be ascertained from a consideration of the statute as a whole. The particular words, clauses and phrases should not be studied as detached and. isolated expressions, but the whole and every part of the statute must be considered in fixing the meaning of any of its parts and in order to produce harmonious whole. (Aispoma v. CA; China Bank v. Ortega; PVA Board of Administrators v. Bautista) 1. Aisporna v. CA Legislative intent of the Insurance Act: whether an insurance subagent or proxy covered in section 189 of Insurance Act. Legislative intent must be ascertained from a consideration of the statute as a whole. The particular words, clauses and phrases should not be studied as detached and isolated expressions, but the whole and every part of the statute must be considered in fixing the meaning of any of its parts and in order to produce harmonious whole. In the present case, the first paragraph of Section 189 prohibits a person from acting as agent, subagent or broker in the solicitation or procurement of applications for insurance without fist procuring a cerificate of authority so to act from the Insurance Commissioner; while the second paragraph defines who is an insurance agent within the intent of the section; while the third paragraph prescribes the penalty to be imposed for its violation. 2. China Bank v. Ortega Whether a banking institution can validly refuse a court process gamishing the bank deposit invoking the provisions of R.A. No. 1405 (An Act prohibiting Disclosure of or Inquiry into, Deposits with any Banking Institution) In gist of the pertinent provisions of RA 1405, Sec. 2., that although transactions with banking institutions in the Philippines is absolutely confidential, there is an exception upon written permission of depositor, or in cases of impeachment, or upon order of the competent court in cases of bribery or dereliction of duty of public officials, or in cases where the money deposited or invested is the subject matter of the litigation. In the present case, China Bank is at default because the court merely required the bank to inform the court whether or not the defendant had a deposit with the bank for the purposes of garnishment issued by the court. However, the disclosure is purely incidental to the execution process. 3. PVA Board of Administrators v. Bautista Whether plaintiff is entitled to the pension from 1955 instead of from 1968. The purpose of Congress in granting veterans pensions is to compensate, as far as may be, a class of men who suffered in the service for the hardships they endured and thedangers they encountered, and more importantly, those who have become incapacitated for work owing to sickness, disease or injuries sustained while in the line of the duty. R.A. No. 65 (Veteran's Bill of Rights) or veteran pension law is therefore. a governmental expression of gratitude to and those who rendered service for the country, by extending to them regular monetary aid. If the pension awards are made effective only upon approval of the application, then the noble and humanitarian purposes for which the law had enacted could easily be thwarted or defeated. Maxim of the Day: Ratio legis est anima—The reason of the law is the soul of the law. 1. It is a basic canon of statutory construction that when the reason of the law ceases, the law itself ceases. Cessante ratione legis, cessat ipsa legis. This principle is also expressed in the maxim ratio legis est anima: the reason of the law is its soul. Itis a consecrated legal axiom that the reason of the law is the life of the law. 2. Where there is ambiguity The words of the Constitution should be interpreted in accordance with the Intent of its framers. The spirit rather than the letter of the law Astatute must be read according to its spirit or intent, for what is within the spirit is within the statute although it is not within the letter, and that which is within the letter but not within the spirit is not within the statute League of Cities vs Comelec, G.R. No. 176951, Dec. 21, 2009 Ration legis est anima. The spirit rather than the letter of the law. statute must be read according to its spirit or intent, for what is within the spirit is within the statute although it is not within its letter, and that which is within the letter but not within the spirit is not within the statute. Principle of constitutionality of statutes—courts ought to reject assaults against the validity of statutes, barring of course their clear unconstitutionality. To doubt is to sustain The law is the product of earnest studies by Congress to ensure that no constitutional prescription or concept is infringed. Before a law dully challenged is nullified, an unequivocal breach of, or a clear conflict with, the Constitution, not merely a doubtful or argumentative one, must be demonstrated ins such a manner as to leave no doubt in the mind of the Court. The Court has the power to suspend its own rules when the ends of justice would be served thereby. Courts should not be shackled by stringent rules which would result in manifest injustice.LEGISLATIVE INTENT Legislative intent is not at all times accurately reflected in the manner in which the resulting law is couched. Applying VERBA LEGIS or strictly literal interpretation of a statute may render it meaningless and lead to inconvenience, an absurd situation or injustice. To obviate this aberration, and bearing in mind the principle that the intent or the spirit of the law is the law itself, resort should be to the rule that the spirit of the law controls. its letter. Legislative intent is part and parcel of the law, the controlling factor in interpreting a statute. In construing a statute, the proper course is to start out and follow the true intent of the Legislature and to adopt the sense that best harmonizes with the context ‘and promotes in the fullest manner the policy and objects of the legislature. Any interpretation that runs counter to the legislative intent is unacceptable and invalid. Torres vs. Limjap_ The intent of a Statute is the Law. Ifa statute is valid, itis to have effect according to the purpose and intent of the lawmaker. The intent is...the essence of the law and the primary rule of construction is to ascertain and give effect to that intent. The intention of the legislature in enacting a law is the law itself, and must be enforced when ascertained, although it may not be consistent with the strict letter of the statute, Courts will not follow the letter of a stature when it leads away from the true intent and purpose of the legislature and to conclusions inconsistent with the general purpose of the act. Intent is the spirit which gives life to a legislative enactment. In construing statutes, the proper course is to start out and follow the true intent of the legisiature Behind every law lies the presumption of constitutionally. Laws will only be declared invalid if a contlict with the Constitution is beyond reasonable doubt.