StatCon Cases Summary

*disclaimer read the cases in the book

Where the law speaks in clear categorical language, there is no room for interpretation, vacillation or
equivocation, there is room only for application.
DIRECTOR OF LANDS VS CA
Private Respondent Teodoro Abistado filed a petition for original registarion of title. Records show that
applicants failed to comply with the provision of Sec.23 PD 1529. The law is unambiguous and its
rationale is clear. Thus, the application for land registration filed by private respondent must be
dismissed.
When the law is clear, it is not susceptible of interpretation. It must be applied regardless of who may
be affected, even if the law may be harsh or erroneous.
OLIVIA PASCUAL VS ESPERANZA PASCUAL BAUTISTA
Don Pascual died intestate without any issue, legitimate, acknowledged natural or adopted spurious
children. Eligio Pascual is a legitimate child but the petitioners are his illegitimate children. The
interpretation of the law desired may be more humane, but it is also an elementary rule that when
words and phrases are clear and unequivocal meaning must be determined from the language
employed and statute must be taken to mean what exactly it says.
The first and fundamental duty of the court is to apply the law
People vs Mapulong
Mapa was charged and convicted of illegal possession of firearm and ammunition, his sole defense is
that he is a secret agent of the Governor of Batangas. The law cannot be any clearer. No provision is
made for a secret agent. He is not exempt. The courts duty is to apply the law.
The duty of the Courts is to apply the law disregarding their feeling of sympathy or pity for the
accused.
People v Amigo
Patricio Amigo was charged and convicted of murder and was sentenced to the penalty of reclusion
perpetua. He claims that the penalty is too harsh. Courts are not forum to plead for sympathy. The duty
of the court is to apply , disregarding the pity for the accused. DURA LEX SED LEX.
Legislative intent is determined principally from the language of the statute.
Socorro Ramirez vs CA
A civil case for damages was filed by the petitioner Socorro Ramirez alleging Ester Garcia vexed and
humiliated her in a hostile manner. The transcript was based from a tape recording. Garcia filed a
motion to quash the information for violation of RA 4200 ( Anti-Wire tapping). RA 4200 clearly makes it
illegal for any person not authorized by all parties to record such communication. RA 4200 penalizes
those who secretly overhear and intercept private communication.
Plain meaning rule or Verba Legis
Globe Mackay vs NLRC
The wording of the Labor Code is clear and unambiguous. An employee who is unjustly dismissed shall
be entitled to reinstatement and full back wages. If a statute is clear and plain and free from ambiguity it
must be given its literal meaning and applied without attempted interpretation.
When the language is clear, it should be given its natural meaning
Basbacio vs DOJ
RA 7309 provides compensation for those unjustly accused. Basbacio was acquitted and filed for such
claims, but it was denied because he was found probably guilty because of the bad blood between the
accused and the victim. Sec 3 of RA 7309 requires that claimant be unjustly accused, the fact that his
case was reversed is not a proof that the conviction was unjust. When the language is clear it should be
given its natural meaning.
In interpreting a statute, care should be taken that every part be given effect.
JMM PROMOTIONS v NLRC
POEA rules are clear, that in addition to the cash and surety bonds and that the escrow money, an
appeal in amount of equivalent to the monetary award is required to perfect an appeal from the
decision of the POEA. Care should be taken that every part be given effect.
RADIOLA TOSHIBA VS IAC
The provision is clear Sec. 32 Insolvency Law attachments that dissolved are those levied within one
month. PAKIBASA DI KO MAGETS HAHAHAHA fucker
A construction that gives to the language used in a statue a meaning that does not accomplish the
purpose for which the statute was enacted should be rejected.
Manuel T. De Guia vs Comelec
No law is ever enacted to be meaningless, the reason for promulgation of RA NO 7166 is to reduce the
number of positions to be voted for providing that the members of Sangguniang Panlalawigan,
Panglungsod and Bayan be elected not at large but by district.
Between two statutory interpretations, that which better serves the purpose of the law should
prevail.
Spouses Enciso were granted of free patents. The spouse via virtue of Deed of Sale sold it to their
daughter Elena. They mortgaged the property and PNB was able to foreclose such. Since Elena is a legal
heir she is capable of repurchase.
When the reason of law ceases, the law itself ceases.
B/Gen. Commendador vs Demetrio Camera
Premptory Challege was originally provided under Art. 18 of Com. Act No. 408, but Pres. Marcos
promulgated PD 39 which disallowed peremptory challenges.. PD 1498 embodied modified challenges
rule. PD 2045 was issued lifting martial law. PD no 39 which withdraw the right for peremptory
challenges become ineffective and was cease automatically by lifting the Martial Law. Does peremptory
challenges are not allowed.
Doctrine of necessary implications. What is implied in a statute is as much as part thereof which is
expressed.
Lydia O Chua vs Civil Service
Chua was a co-terminous employee who applied for Early retirement Law, but the application was
denied .
The Early Retirement Law would violate equal protection clause which the benefits of the law denied a
class of govt employees who are similarly situated as those covered. No statute can provide all the
details involved in the application. The doctrine states which implied is as much as which is expressed.
City of Manila vs Judge Amador
Revise Charter of Manila, fixes annual realty tax to 1 and 1/2 % but Special Education Fund Law allows
additional tax of 1% but that total real property tax shall not exceed 3%.
Manila fixes then its realty tax to 3%, 1 by the charter 1% by Special Educ Fund law and by the
ordinance created.
The additional taxes were valid, it is implied from the Special Education Fund Law that real property tax
shall not exceed 3% per annum, which implication allowed additional half percent imposed by
municipality.

Casus Omissys can operate only if and when the omission has been clearly established.
People vs Guillermo Manantan
The legislature did not excluded or omit justice of the peace from the enumerations, they were merely
called by another term, as judges.
Stare Decisis Follow past precedents and do not disturb what has been settled. Etc..
JM Tuason vs Manuela
A case has already been decided same to this one. The court should follow past precedents.
Pakibasa na lang hahahaha. Hirap isummarize
When the law does not distinguish the court should not distinguish.
Philippine British vs IAC
That the counterbond is intended to secure the payment of ANY JUDGEMENT. WHEN IT SPEAKS OF
ANY JUDGEMENT IT SHOULD BE INTERPRETED TO REFER NOT ONLY TO FINAL AND EXECUTORY
JUDGEMENT BUT ALSO JUDGEMENT PENDING ON APPEAL.
Juanito Pilar vs Comelec
SEC. 14 of RA no. 7166 states that every candidate has the obligation to file his statement of
contribution and expenditures, the law makes no distinction as whether or not the candidate pursued
his candidacy or withdrew the same.
People vs Tugonon
Tugonon was charged of frustrated homicide and was sentenced to one year of prision correctional. On
appeal he was imposed of indeterminate penalty of 2 months of arresto mayor, as to minimum of
2years and 4 months of prision correcional. He then filed for probation, it was granted but later on
revoke for those who appeal the case are barred from filing probation. He then alleges that his appeal
was meritorious. But the law makes no distinction regarding meritorious appeals.
Ceicilio De Villa vs CA
BP 22 DOES NOT DISTUINGUISH THE CURRENCY INVOLVED IN THE CASE.
GENERAL TERMS MAY BE RESTRICTED BY SPECIFIC WORDS. THE RULE IS APPLICABLE ONLY TO CASES
FOR ONE GENERAL TERM all the items fall under one specific class.
COLGATE vs Jimenez
The term stabilizers and flavours is preceded by articles which could be classified as food or food
products, but the other does not fall within the same class.
Since the law does not distinguish the between the stabilizers and flavors it must be construe in their
general terms. Those use for dental cream and toothpaste are exempted from Special excise tax.
ESJUDEM GENERIS
RP vs Migrino and Troadio
In interpreting subordinate esjudem generis should not be used.
Same with People vs Echavez
It does not include agricultural land.
Misael Vera VS SERAFIN CUEVAS
Skimmed Milk is not to be construed as same with filled milk. Under Esjudem generis general and
unlimited terms are to be limited to particular terms they followed in the statue.