IV.

Linguistic Canons of Interpretation for officers or employees shall be created by

any employer. All supplementary retirement
A. Whole Act Rule or pension plans heretofore in force in any
government office, agency, or
PITC vs Commission on Audit instrumentality or corporation owned or
Facts: controlled by the government, are hereby
Eligia Romero is an officer at the declared inoperative or abolished”
Philippine International Trading Corp. who
opted to retire under R.A 1616 but then still Lesson:
remained in service until her compulsory It is a rule in statutory construction
retirement. She sought to have payment of that every part of the statute must be
retirement differential based on Sec 6 EO interpreted with reference to the context,
No.756 that states the entitlement to one that every part of the statute must be
month pay for each year of service. considered together with the other parts.

COA Assistant Commissioner The law must not be read in

Raquel Habitan assailed the first ruling truncated parts, its provisions must be read
saying Executive Order No. 756 was a in relation to the whole law. Clauses and
special law issued only for the specific phrases must not be isolated and detached
purpose of reorganizing the corporation and expressions. All the words in the statute
intended for employees retired, separated or must be taken into consideration in order to
resigned in connection with the ascertain its meaning
reorganization and was not meant to be a Interpretere et concordare legibus est
permanent retirement scheme for its optimus interpretendi.
employees. Every statute must be so interpreted
and brought in accord with other laws as to
Ruling: form a uniform system of jurisprudence.
Rather than the permanent retirement
law for its employees, the SC ruled that the The best method of interpretation is
provision of gratuities was clearly meant as that which makes laws consistent with other
an incentive for employees who retire, laws which are to be harmonized rather than
resign or are separated from service during having one considered repealed in favor of
or as a consequence of the reorganization the other.
petitioner's Board of Directors was tasked to
implement.

Section 6 of Executive Order No.

756 was reconciled with Section 28,
Subsection (b) of Commonwealth Act No.
186 stating “No insurance or retirement plan

OSINADA
JMM Promotions vs NLRC would in effect nullify Section 6 as a
Facts: superfluity but we do not see any such
The National Labor Relations redundancy; on the contrary, we find that
Commission dismissed JMM Promotions’ Section 6 complements Section 4 and
appeal from a decision of the Philippine Section 17.
Overseas Employment Administration on
the ground of failure to post the required A reading thereof readily shows that in
appeal bond. addition to the cash and surety bonds and the
escrow money, an appeal bond in an amount
The respondent cited the second equivalent to the monetary award is required
paragraph of Article 223 of the Labor Code to perfect an appeal from a decision of the
and Rule VI, Section 6 of the new Rules of POEA.
Procedure of the NLRC which state that any
judgment involving monetary reward may Lesson:
be perfected only upon the posting of a cash It is a principle of legal hermeneutics
or surety bond issued by a reputable bonding that in interpreting a statute, care should be
company. The petitioner contends that the taken that every part thereof be given effect,
NLRC committed grave abuse of discretion on the theory that it was enacted as an
in applying these rules to decisions rendered integrated measure and not as a
by the POEA. It insists that the appeal bond hodge-podge of conflicting provisions.
is not necessary in the case of licensed
recruiters for overseas employment because
they are already required under POEA Rules
Ut res magis valeat quam pereat.
The petitioner already posted a total The rule is that a construction that
bond of P150,000.00 and placed in escrow would render a provision inoperative should
the amount of P200,000.00 as required by be avoided; instead, apparently
the POEA Rules but was indeed still inconsistent provisions should be
required to post an appeal bond n an amount reconciled whenever possible as parts of a
equivalent to the monetary award is required coordinated and harmonious whole.
to perfect an appeal from a decision of the
POEA.

Ruling:
Under the petitioner’s interpretation,
the appeal bond required by Section 6 of the
aforementioned POEA Rule should be
disregarded because of the earlier bonds and
escrow money it has posted. The petitioner

OSINADA
Cocofed vs COMELEC allowed to simply refuse to submit a list
Facts: containing "not less than five nominees" and
The Cocofed is an organization consider the deficiency as a waiver on its
whose membership comes from the peasant part.
sector, particularly the coconut farmers and
producers. COMELEC canceled “Shall” was used so it is a requirement.
COCOFED’s registration and accreditation Lesson:
as a party-list organization on several Basic rule of statutory construction
grounds. Mainly they submitted only 2 that the provisions of the law must not be
nominees when sec 8 of RA 7941 requires read in isolation but as a whole, as the law
not less than 5. Coelec denied the must not be read in truncated parts; its
Manifestations of Intent to Participate, and provisions in relation to the whole law and
canceled the registration and accreditation of every part thereof must be considered in
Cocofed. fixing the meaning of any of its parts in
order to produce a harmonious whole.
Cocofed argues that the requirement
of submitting the names of at least five B. Ejusdem Generis
nominees should not be strictly applied "in Mutuc vs COMELEC
light of the nature of party-list Facts:
representation" which "looks to the party, Amelito Mutuc is a candidate for
and not to the nominees per se." COCOFED delegate to the Constitutional Convention. A
adds that the number of nominees becomes week before the election, the Comelec
significant only "when a party-list informed him that his certificate of
organization is able to attain a sufficient candidacy was given due course but
number of votes which would qualify it for a prohibited him from using jingles in his
seat in the House of Representatives." mobile units equipped with sound systems
and loud speakers, an order which,
The Comelec stated that the petition is moot according to him, is "violative of his
and academic. Cocofed argues that the constitutional right to freedom of speech."
COMELEC indeed gravely abused its
discretion in issuing the assailed resolution. Ruling:
Court ruled in favor of Mutuc
Ruling: granting the writ of prohibition, setting forth
The petition is not moot but the the absence of statutory authority on the part
COMELEC did not gravely abuse its of respondent to impose such a ban in the
discretion in issuing the assailed resolution. light of the absence of doctrine of ejusdem
The law expressly requires the submission generis as well as the principle that the
of a list containing at least five qualified construction placed on the statute by
nominees as stated in Section 8 of RA No. respondent Commission on Elections would
7941. Given this driving idea, a party is not raise serious doubts about its validity,

OSINADA
considering the infringement of the right of BSU thinks that the term
free speech of petitioner. "program/projects" embraces all programs
of BSU and that the CoA erred in affirming
Lesson: the disallowance of rice subsidy and health
The words“distribution of electoral care benefits.
propaganda gadgets and the like” are
general words which under the ejusdem Ruling:
generis, any following enumeration made The COA correctly ruled that the
there after would only mean things of the "other programs/projects" under R.A. No.
same kind or class as those specifically 8292 and its Implementing Rules should be
referred to. of the same nature as instruction, research,
and extension. The disbursements were for
Benguet SU vs CoA rice subsidy and health care allowances
Facts: which are, in no way, intended for academic
BSU seeks to nullify the CoA programs similar to instruction, research, or
decision disallowing the rice subsidy and extension. Section 4 (d) cannot, therefore, be
health care allowance to the employees of relied upon by BSU as the legal basis for the
BSU. The commission cited from the grant of the allowances.
constitution specifically Section 8, Article
IX-B, "No elective or appointive public Lesson:
officers or employee shall receive Under the maxim of ejusdem
additional, double or indirect compensation, generis, the mention of a general term after
unless specifically authorized by law" the enumeration of specific matters should
be held to mean that the general term
BSU says that rice subsidy IS should be of the same genus as the
granted by law, specifically Section 4 of specific matters enumerated.
R.A. No. 8292, otherwise known as the
Higher Education Modernization Act of Under the principle of ejusdem
1997. Any provision of existing laws, rules generis, where a statute describes things of a
and regulations to the contrary particular class or kind accompanied by
notwithstanding, any income generated by words of a generic character, the generic
the university or college, from tuition fee word will usually be limited to things of a
and other charges, as well as from the similar nature with those particularly
operation of auxiliary services and land enumerated, unless there be something in
grants, shall be retained by the university or the context of the statute which would repel
college, and may be disbursed by the Board such inference.
of Regents/Trustees for instruction, research,
extension or other programs/projects of the
university or college

OSINADA
C. Noscitur a Sociis being the case, said statute, particularly its
provisions dealing with procedure, should be
Buenaseda vs Flavier given such interpretation that will effectuate
Facts: the purposes and objectives of the
The petition seeks to nullify the Constitution. Any interpretation that will
Order of the Ombudsman issued upon the hamper the work of the Ombudsman should
recommendation of Director Raul Arnaw be avoided.
and Investigator Amy de Villa-Rosero,
without affording petitioners the opportunity A statute granting powers to an
to contest the charges filed against them. agency created by the Constitution should be
Petitioners had sought to disqualify Director liberally construed for the advancement of
Arnav and Investigator Villa-Rosero for the purposes and objectives for which it
manifest partiality and bias. was created.

The crucial issue is whether the Lesson:

Ombudsman has the power to suspend Under the rule of Noscitor a sociis,
government officials and employees the word "suspension" should be given the
working in offices other than the Office of same sense as the other words with which
the Ombudsman, pending the investigation it is associated. Where a particular word is
of the administrative complaints filed equally susceptible of various meanings, its
against said officials and employees. correct construction may be made specific
by considering the company of terms in
Ruling: which it is found or with which it is
Under the Constitution, the associated
Ombudsman is expressly authorized to
recommend to the appropriate official the People vs Flores
discipline or prosecution of erring public Facts:
officials or employees. It can not be said Isidro Flores was found guilty for
that Director Raul Arnaw and Investigator two counts of rape. AAA lived with her
Amy de Villa-Rosero acted with manifest adoptive mother BBB who in turn is married
partiality and bias in recommending the to Flores who was working abroad.
suspension of petitioners. Pagkagamit ng
suspension here is penalty-like which is a Then 11 y.o AAA was sleeping
siren call. The suspension should be inside the house when she felt and saw
preemptive only. appellant touch her thighs. He told her not to
tell anyone and then went away to touch
The purpose of R.A. No. 6770 is to himself. The next time it happened, AAA
give the Ombudsman such powers as he tried to resist but the appellant threatened
may need to perform efficiently the task that he would kill her and BBB.
committed to him by the Constitution. Such

OSINADA
 After a few weeks, AAA was already father. Clearly, appellant is not the
asleep when she suddenly woke up and saw "guardian" contemplated by law.
appellant holding a knife. While pointing the
knife at AAA’s neck, appellant removed his Lesson:
shorts, as well as AAA’s pajamas. He slowly The maxim noscitur a sociis,
parted AAA’s legs and inserted his penis the correct construction of a word or phrase
into AAA’s vagina. . AAA recounted that susceptible of various meanings may be
appellant raped her at least three (3) times a made clear and specific by considering the
week at around the same time until 15 company of words in which it is found or
October 2002 (since 1999) with which it is associated.

Flores was found guilty and during GSIS vs CoA

trial, qualifying circumstance of minority Facts:
and circumstance of relationship were being The CoA, through Escarda, affirmed
considered. The issue in said case was the disallowances made by Dimagiba. While
whether or not the qualifying circumstance the GSIS may have the power to adopt an
of relationship be considered with Flores as early retirement or a financial assistance
a guardian. plan under its charter, it cannot supplement a
retirement plan already existing under the
Ruling: law.

No, section 31(c) of R.A. No. 7610 D. Espresso Unius Est Exclusio Alterius
contains a listing of the circumstances of Paramount Insurance vs AC Corp
relationship between the perpetrator and the Lesson:
victim which will justify the imposition of We have ruled that the new rule, as
the maximum penalty, namely when the opposed to Section 13, Rule 14 of the 1964
perpetrator is an "ascendant, parent, Rules of Court, is restricted, limited and
guardian, stepparent or collateral relative exclusive, following the rule in statutory
within the second degree of consanguinity or construction that expressio unios est exclusio
affinity." It should be noted that the words alterius.
with which "guardian" is associated in the
provision all denote a legal relationship. Centeno vs Villalon-Pornillos
From this description we may safely deduce Lesson:
that the guardian envisioned by law is a I. Indeed, it is an elementary rule of
person who has a legal relationship with a statutory construction that the express
ward. This relationship may be established mention of one person, thing, act, or
either by being the ward’s biological parent consequence excludes all others. This rule
(natural guardian) or by adoption (legal is expressed in the familiar maxim
guardian). Appellant is neither AAA’s "expressio unius est exclusio alterius."
biological parent nor is he AAA’s adoptive Where a statute, by its terms, is expressly

OSINADA
limited to certain matters, it may not, by
interpretation or construction, be extended to
others. The rule proceeds from the premise
that the legislature would not have made
specified enumerations in a statute had the
intention been not to restrict its meaning and
to confine its terms to those expressly
mentioned.

OSINADA