1.

Applying the legal maxim of Ejusdem Generis, where the general words
follow an enumeration by particular words and specific meaning, such
general words are not to be construed in its widest extent, but are to be
held as those specially mentioned. In the case at bar, the phrase, all
vehicles is limited by the enumeration of trucks, buses, SUVs,
Motorcycles, which are all pollution-emitting vehicles are should be
registered under the law. The law cannot include bicycles because it does
not emit black smoke and therefore not pollution-emitting vehicle. Thus, a
bicycle does not fall under the same class with those specifically
mentioned in the law.
2. If I were the lawyer of the precinct officer, I will use the legal maxims of
Ejusdem Generis and Ratio Legis or the Spirit of the Law, which will give
meaning and effect to the legislative intent in enacting laws. In the case
at bar, the law only covers communicable illnesses. While the phrase,
other communicable illness cannot be construed in its widest extent as
provided by Ejusdem Generis, and chicken pox is not expressly
mentioned in the enumeration, it is one of the communicable diseases
that the law intends to protect the community from. It is in the spirit of
the law to protect the community from all diseases, which can be acquired
through interaction with other people.
If I were the lawyer of Mr. Magaling, I will invoke that the rule is merely
permissive or directory as evidenced by the use of the word, may,
which in statutory construction, does not denote a mandatory act. Thus,
it is not mandated for all persons inflicted with communicable diseases to
vote online. It is discretionary on the voters part. Hence,
Mr. Magaling
may also vote at the precinct.
3. The proviso in the law does not apply to Berto. A proviso is a clause that
qualifies or restrains the generality of a provision in the law. It should be
construed to give reference to the immediately preceding part or words in
the provision to which it is attached. The proviso, provided that their
family income is below Php 1,000 a month is only applicable to all
college students of public schools regardless of the course taken. Berto, in
this case, is a college student from a private school and his course is not
related to molecular science. Therefore, he cannot avail of the free tuition
under the law because he does not fall under the college students in the
proviso.
4. The presumption of against unconstitutionality of laws operates in this
case. A law, being a joint act of the legislative and executive branches of
the government, is supposed to have been carefully studied and
determined to be constitutional before it was finally enacted in respect to
the doctrine of separation of powers. The Court will not motu propio
declare a law unconstitutional because all laws are presumed valid and

constitutional until or unless otherwise proven to be contrary to the

Constitution. Mere doubtful or argumentative implication will not justify
the nullification of a law. The one assailing the validity of a law must prove
that it is clearly and unequivocally repugnant or contrary to the
Constitution.

5. There is a presumption against injustice. Laws should never be

interpreted as to cause injustice as it is never within the legislative intent
for we presume the good motives of the legislature in enacting laws and
that is to render justice. In the case of Salvacion vs. Central Bank, the
bank account of the American, who was convicted of raping Karen
Salvacion, was used to indemnify his victim. In this case, there would be
injustice if the law is to be interpreted to prohibit the garnishment of a
foreign currency deposit of a foreign depositor thereby exempting Mr.
Ratatats bank account from indemnifying Linda, whom he brutally beat
up. Therefore, Mr. Ratatats foreign currency deposit can be garnished or
attached to defray his civil liabilities to Linda. Law and justice are
inseparable and we must keep it so.
6. Intrinsic and extrinsic aids are used in statutory construction to determine
the legislative intent. Intrinsic aids are those which are found in the law
itself, such as the title, preamble, body or context, provisions and
subtitles, which may elucidate the meaning of the statute because the
best interpreter of the law is the law itself. If there is still ambiguity in the
law after construing it using intrinsic aids, extrinsic aids, which are
interpretations found outside of the law itself, are resorted to. Examples of
extrinsic aids are history of enactment, minutes/records of floor
deliberations, rulings and opinions of officials tasked to implement the
law, legislative committee reports, judicial construction and construction
by the bar.
7. Mr. Galingdating is not exempted from tax imposition. It is a well-settled
rule in statutory construction that laws providing tax exemptions are
strictly construed against the taxpayer claiming exemption and favorably
to the taxing authority. Thus, Mr. Galingdating an inspirational speaker is
not classified as professional entertainers who are exempted from tax levy
in view of performing for the members of the AFP. Taxes are costs of
sustaining the nation. Any exemption entails reduction of money collected
for the government operations.
8. The teacher should file her case with the VSRA. Under the rules of
statutory construction on conflicting statutes, special laws prevail over
general laws, regardless of the dates of its enactment. Here, the special
law granting jurisdiction to VSRA was passed in 2009 and the general law

granting jurisdiction to DepEd was passed in 2011. The dates of

enactment are immaterial because a special law is treated as an
exemption to the general law. Further, a general law cannot repeal a
special law unless there is an express mention of such intent in the
general law.
9. Mr. Hayopmahal can be prosecuted under the 2014 law. Repeal by
implication is not favored in construing statutes. Although the two laws in
this case refer to the same subject matter, the legislature is presumed to
have known the existing laws and not to have enacted conflicting laws. To
repeal a law through implication, the two laws - old and new must be
irreconcilable, inconsistent and repugnant to each other; cannot be
harmonized and construed to give effect to each other. In the case at bar,
the two laws can be still reconciled and can stand along side each other.
Therefore, there is no repeal to speak of.
10. The new law can be applied to Mr. Kamalasan if he is not a habitual
criminal. Generally, laws have prospective application; however, it may be
given retrospective effect if: it is a penal law that is more favorable to the
accused who is not a habitual criminal; it is curative unless it impairs
vested rights, it is procedural unless vested rights are impaired; and its
retrospective application is specifically provided in the law. In the case at
bar, assuming that he is not a habitual criminal, he is entitled to the
retroactive effect of the recent law which provides for a lesser penalty.
11. Suprema lex is the Latin legal maxim that means supreme law. The
Constitution is the supreme law of the nation. It is regarded as our
fundamental and paramount law which must be accorded with the highest
respect and obedience. All laws must be in conformity and accordance to
the Constitution because it is a social contract between the government
and the sovereign people. It is the embodiment of the peoples will. Thus,
everyone must respect, abide and defend it.
12. Butterfly Co. should not be exempt from export tax. While their
contention on the rule that tax laws are construed liberally in favor of the
taxpayer is correct, laws granting tax exemption are construed strictly
against the taxpayer claiming it. Taxes are the nations lifeblood. Any tax
exemption is tantamount to a diminution of money to be used for
governments operations. Thus, the claimant must prove without a doubt
that they are entitled to such exemption. Using extrinsic aids ascertain
the legislative intent for such law, opinions of government agencies,
which is tasked to implement the tax exemption should be given respect
and high regard. In this case, the BIR issued an opinion that only honey in
its natural and original form are tax exempt, Butterfly Co.s honey flavored
candy is not tax exempt as it does not fall under the provision of the law.

13. Mr. Kapalpakan is entitled to claim for damages for the injuries he
sustained under Article 2189 of the New Civil Code. When there is a
conflict of laws, generally, special laws prevail over general laws.
However, there are exceptions. A specific or special provision in a general
law prevails over the general provision of a special law. As in this case,
the Citys charter is a special law and the New Civil Code is a general law;
however, the city invokes a general provision in their charter, which
cannot prevail over the specific provision of the NCC. Therefore, the city is
liable for Mr. Kapalpakans injuries.
14. The motion to arraign in absencia should be dismissed. The statutory
construction rule that penal laws and procedural laws have retroactive
application should not be invoked because applying it would be
detrimental to the accused and will impair his vested right of due process.
Retroactive application of penal and procedural laws is not automatic. It is
merely discretionary as the accused can choose to invoke said application
if it is favorable to him assuming he is not a habitual criminal and will not
affect his vested rights. In this case, applying the new law retroactively
will not be beneficial to the accused.
15. A constitutional provision is said to be self-executing when it is
already complete in itself without need for an enabling and
supplementary statute for it to take effect. The presumption is that all
provisions of the Constitution are self-executing unless the contrary is
clearly intended. If treated otherwise, the Constitution would lose its
supremacy over all other laws since legislature would have the power to
ignore and practically nullify the mandate of the fundamental law. It will
be subservient to the law-making power of the legislature as it will require
passage of a law for its provision to take effect.
16.
17.
18. Rogelio Aldub is liable for not filing a statement of contributions and
expenditures. RA 7166 provides that every candidate must file such
statement. The legal maxim of ubi lex non distinguit nec nos distinguere
debemos is applicable in this case which provides that when that law does
not distinguish, the courts should not distinguish. In the case of Pilar vs
Comelec, the Supreme Court held that the law did not distinguish a
withdrawing candidate from other regular candidates in the requirement.
Thus, Mr. Aldub is to be held liable.
19.
20. As the lawyer for Mr. Samangpalad, I would argue that my client has
incurred his ailment due to hazardous working conditions, or at least raise
a possibility that it's the illness is caused by hazardous working
conditions. This will allow us to invoke the liberal application of labor laws
in favor of the laborer.
21.

22. The case should not be dismissed because what is involved is an

election protest. Under the statutory construction rule on the liberal
construction of election contests over technical objections to give effect to
the will of the people. In such contests, procedural and technical rules
may be relaxed, but not totally disregarded, in view of public interest.
23.
24.
25.