I.

Rules of Statutory Construction

1.
VERBA LEGIS NON EST RECEDENDUM

literal interpretation/plain meaning rule; from the clearlanguage of the law there should be no
departure. (Colgate Palmolive Phil vs Gimenez GR# 14787 January 28,1961)2.
ABSOLUTA SENTENTIA EXPOSITORE NON INDIGET
--when you have plain words capable of only one interpretation, no explanation of them is
required (Gan vs Reyes GR# 145527 May 28, 2002)3.
RATIO LEGIS EST ANIMA

interpretation by considering the spirit and reason of the law; the reasonof the law is the soul of
the law (Comendador vs De Villa GR# 93177 August 2, 1991)4.
QUI HARET IN LITERA HAERET IN CORTICE
--he who considers merely the letter of an instrumentgoes but skin deep into its meaning (People
vs Puno GR# 97471 February 17, 1993)5.
IN PARI DELICTO POTIOR EST CONDITIO DEFENDENTIS

doctrine of unclean hands; whenboth parties are in the wrong, a defence is set up (Spouses
Angel vs Aledo GR# 145031 January 22, 2004)6.
EX DOLO MALO NON ORITUR ACTIO
--out of fraud no action arises (People vs Manansala GR# L-38948 November 18, 1933)7.
EJUSDEM GENERIS
--a word takes its meaning from those around it; of the same kind (Mutuc vsCOMELEC GR #
32717 November 26, 1970)8.
NOSCITUR A SOCIIS

doctrine of associated words; a word should be interpreted within context(Caltex Phil vs Palomar
GR# 19650 September 29, 1966)9.
EXPRESSIO/INCLUSIO UNIUS EST EXCLUSIO ALTERIUS
--the expression/inclusion of one is theexclusion of another or others (Centeno vs VillalonPornillos GR# 113092 September 1, 1994)10.
EXPRESSIUM FACIT CESSARE TACITURN
--what is expressed puts an end to what is implied (Canet vsDecena GR# 155344 January 20,
2004)11.
CASUS OMISUS PRO OMISUS HABENDUS EST

doctrine of intentional omission; a person, object orthing omitted from an enumeration must be
held to have been omitted intentionally (People vs Manantan GR#14120 July 31, 1962)12.
UBI LEX NON DISTINGUIT NEC NOS DISTINGUERE DEBEMOS

when the law does not distinguish,neither should we (Llamas vs Orbos GR# 99031 October 15,
1991)13.
AD PROXIMUM ANTECEDENS FIAT RELATIO NISI IMPEDIATUR SENTENCIA

doctrine of lastantecedent; relative words refer to the nearest antecedent unless it be prevented
by the context (Mapa vs ArroyoGR# 78585 July 5, 1989)

14.
REDENDO SINGULA SINGULIS
--antecedents should be read distributively to the effect that each word isto be applied to the
subject to which it appears by context most properly related and to which it is most
applicable(People vs Tamani GR# 22160 January 21, 1974)15.
IN EO PLUS SIT, SIMPER INEST ET MINUS

doctrine of necessary implication; the greater includes thelesser (Atienza vs Villarosa GR#
161081 May 10, 2005)16.
IN PARI MATERIA
--when a statute is ambiguous, its meaning may be determined in light of other statuteson the
same subject; upon the same matter or subject (Co vs Civil Register of Manila GR# 138496
February 23,2004)17.
INTERPRETARE ET CONCORDARE LEGIBUS EST OPTIMUS INTERPRETENDI
--every statutemust be so interpreted and brought into accord with other laws as to form a
uniform system of jurisprudence(Hagad vs Gozo-Dadole GR # 108072 December 12, 1995)18.
LEGES POSTERIORES PRIORES CONTRARIAS ABROGANT

doctrine of implied repeals; subsequentlaws repeal those earlier laws which are contrary to it
(Manila Trading & Supply Company vs Phil Labor UnionGR# L-47796 April 22, 1941)19.
CONTEMPORANEO EXPOSITIO EST OPTIMA ET FORTISSIMA IN LEGE

doctrine of contemporaneous construction; contemporaneous construction is the best and

strongest in law (People vs PunoGR# 97471 February 17, 1993)20.
GENERALIA SPECIALIBUS NON DEROGANT
--general things do not detract from specific things(National Power Corporation vs Presiding
Judge, RTC BR XXV GR # 72477 October 16, 1990)
II. Other Legal Maxims
1.

FAVORABILIA SUNT AMPLIANDA ADIOSA RESTRIGENDA

--penal laws which are favorable toaccused are given retroactive effect (Ortega vs People GR #
151085 August 20, 2008)2.
LEX PROSPICIT, NON RESPICIT

the law looks forward, never backward (Laceste vs Santos GR#L-36886 February 1, 1932)3.
NULLUM CRIMEN, NULLA POENA SINE LEGE

there is no crime when there is no law punishingit (People vs Cabural GR# L-34105 February 4,
1983)4.
IGNORANTIA LEGIS NON EXCUSAT
--ignorance of the law does not excuse (Tanada vs Tuvera GR#.L-63915 April 24, 1985)5.
IGNORANTIA FACTI EXCUSAT
--ignorance of facts excuses (People vs Oanis GR# G.R. No. L47722July 27, 1943)6.
PAR IN PAREM NON HABET IMPERIUM
--an equal has no power over an equal (Wylie vs RarangGR # 74135 May 28, 1992)--used in
international law to mean that one country may not imposeits authority over another; mentioned
in state immunity cases7.
SEMPER PRAESUMTIUR PRO MATRIMONIO
--always presume marriage (Corpus vs Corpus GR#L-22469 October 23, 1978)

8.
ACTIO PERSONALIS MORITUR CUM PERSONA
--a personal action is extinguished by the death of the person (De Castro vs COMELEC GR#
12549 February 7, 1997)9.
ACTUS ME INVITO FACTUS NON EST MEUS ACTUS
--an act done against my will is not my act(People vs Del Rosario GR# 127755 April 14, 1999)10.
ALLEGATIO CONTRA FACTUM NON EST ADMITTENDA
--allegations contrary to facts shall not beadmitted (Co Kim Cham vs Valdez Tan Keh GR# L-5
September 17, 1945)11.
STARE DECISIS ET NON QUIETA MOVERE
--stand by your decision and do not disturb the calm/ whatis settled (Ting vs Velez-Ting GR#
166562 March 31, 2009)12.
RES JUDICATA
--barred by prior judgment; estoppel by judgment (Taganas vs Meliton GR# 146980September 2,
2003)Elements of Res Judicata:the former judgment or order must be finalthe judgment or order
must be on the meritsit must have been rendered by a court having jurisdiction over the subject
matter and the partiesthere must be, between the first and the second action, identity of parties,
of subject matter andcause of action13.
LEGIS INTERPRETATIO LEGIS VIM OBTINET

--interpretations made upon the law by competent courtsforms part of the law of the land (People
vs Jabinal GR# L-30061 February 27, 1974)14.
DURA LEX SED LEX
--the law may be harsh but it is the law (In Re Petition for Adoption of Michelle LimGR# 168992
May 21, 2009)15.
RATIONE CESSAT LEX, ET CESSAT LEX
--when the reason for the law ceases, the law ceases (Griffithvs CA GR# 129764 March 12,
2002)16.
DELEGATUS NON POTEST DELEGARE
--a delegate may not delegate (People vs Rosenthal GR#L-46076 June 12, 1939) --used primarily
in the principle of non-delegation of legislative powers17.
UBI JUS IBI REMEDIUM
--where there is a right there is a remedy (Primicias vs Ocampo GR# L6120June 30, 1953)18.
FIAT JUSTICIA RUAT COELUM
--do justice, let the sky fall (People vs Romualdez GR# 31012September 10, 1932)19.
SALUS POPULI EST SUPREMA LEX
--the welfare of the people is the supreme law (US vs Salaveria GR#L-13678 November 12,
1918)20.
SIC UTERE TUO UT ALIENUM NON LAEDAS
--do not use your property so as to injure others (Santosvs De Alvarez GR# L-332 June 18,
1947)21.
RES INTER ALIOS ACTA NOBIS NEC NOCET, NEC PRODEST
--a transaction between two partiesought not to operate to the prejudice of a third person
(Tinitigan vs Tinitigan GR# L-45418 October 30, 1980)