Assignment:

1. What is legislative intent?

Legislative intent, generally

It is the essence of the law.

It is the spirit, which gives life to legislative enactment. Intent must be enforced when ascertained, although it may not be consistent with the strict letter of the statute.

THUS, WHERE A STATUTE IS SUSCEPTIBLE OF MORE THAN ONE CONSTRUCTION THAT CONSTRUCTION SHOULD BE ADOPTED WHICH WILL MOST TEND TO GIVE EFFECT TO THE MANIFEST INTENT OF THE LEGISLATURE

Intent is equated with the words: purpose, meaning and spirit.

Ascertainment of a legislative intent depends more on the purpose and object of the law.

Sources of legislative Intent

Primary Source: Law/statute itself LEGISLATIVE INTENT MUST BE DISCOVERED FROM THE FOUR CORNERS OFTHE LAW. Words and phrases of the statute not obscure or ambiguous its meaning and the intent of the legislature must be determined from the language employed.Words used are ambiguous court may look beyond the statute such as its legislative history, circumstances, evil meant to be redressed. Other sources: Purpose of the statute The reason or casue which induced the enactment of the law Mischief to be suppressed Policy which dictated the passage

2. Doctrine of Verba LegisPlain-meaning ruleWell-settled that where the language of the law is clear and unequivocal.It must be given literal application and applied without interpretatipn.

3. Stare Decisis

Stare decisis et non quieta movere one should follow past precedents and should not disturb what has been settled. Reason for such doctrine: the Supreme Court has a duty not only of interpreting and applying the law but also in protecting the society from needless upheavals. Interest reipublicae ut sit finis litium interest of then state demands that there be an end to litigation.A ruling in order to come within the doctrine of stare decision must be categorically stated in the issue expressly raised by the parties; must be a direct ruling.Rulings that are merely sub silencio are merely obiter dictum (an opinion of the court upon some question of law which is not necessary to the decision of the case before it; not binding)This doctrine is not absolute because Supreme Court may change or abandon a precedent enunciated it.

4. Doctrine of Necessity Implication No statute can be enacted that can provide all the details involved in its application. There is always an omission that may not meet a particular situation. What is thought, at the time of enactment, to be an all-embracing legislation may be inadequate to provide for the unfolding events of the future. So-called gaps in the law develop as the law is enforced. One of the rules of statutory construction used to fill in the gap is the doctrine of necessary implication. The doctrine states that what is implied in a statute is as much a part thereof as that which is expressed. Every statute is understood, by implication, to contain all such provisions as may be necessary to effectuate its object and purpose, or to make effective rights, powers, privileges or jurisdiction which it grants, including all such collateral and subsidiary consequences as may be fairly and logically inferred from its terms.Ex necessitate legis. And every statutory grant of power, right or privilege is deemed to include all incidental power, right or privilege. This is so because the greater includes the lesser, expressed in the Maxim,in eo plus sit, simper inest et minus.

5. Contemporaneous Construction XIX. CONTEMPORARY CONSTRUCTIONA. Definition: these are constructions placed upon statues at the time of, or after, their enactment by the executive, legislature or judicial authorities, as well as by those who, because of their involvement in the process of legislation, are knowledgeable of the intent and purpose of the law.B. Contemporanea expositio est optima et fortissima in lege the contemporary construction is strongest in law.C. Contemporaneous construction is the construction placed upon the statute by an executive or administrative officer called upon to execute or administer such statue.D. Executive and administrative officers are generally the very first official to interpret the law. These interpretations are in the form of:1. rules2. regulations3. circulars4. directives5. opinions and6. rulings.E. Types of executive interpretation:1. Construction by an executive or administrative officer directly called to implement the law which may be:(a) expressed (ex. Interpretation embodied in circulars, directive or regulation)(b) implied. (a practice of enforcement of not applying the statute to certain situations)2. Construction by the Secretary of Justice in his capacity as the chief legal adviser of the government in the form of opinions. In the absence of the ruling of a president, the opinions of Sec. Of Justice is controlling among administrative and executive officials.3. Interpretation handed down in and adversary proceeding in the form of a ruling by an executive office exercising quasijudicial power.Note: In the absence of error or abuse of power or lack of jurisdiction or grave abuse of discretion clearly conflicting with either the letter or the spirit of a legislative enactment creating or changing a governmental agency, the action of the agency would not be disturbed by the courts.E. Reason why contemporaneous construction is given much weight:It comes from the particular branch of government called upon to implement the law thus construed these same people are the drafters of the law they interpret.F. When to disregard Contemporaneous constructionThis contemporaneous construction is not binding upon the court. The court may disregard it:1. Where there is no ambiguity in the law2. Where the construction is clearly erroneous3. Where strong reason to the contrary exists4. Where the court has previously given the statue a different interpretationG. If there is an error in implementation of the law, such error may be corrected. The doctrine of estoppel does not apply.H. As a rule, erroneous contemporaneous construction creates no vested right on the part of those who relied and followed such construction. But this rule is not absolute. There may be exceptions in the interest of justice and fair play (ex. Tax cases)I. Legislative interpretation: the legislature may provide an interpretation or declaration clause in a statue by they cannot limit or restrict the power granted to courts.1. While legislative interpretation is not controlling, courts may resort to it to clarify ambiguity in the language.2. Such legislative interpretation is entitled of respect especially of the executive department has similarly construed the statute.J. Legislative approval the legislature, by action or inaction approve or ratify such contemporaneous construction. Such approval may manifest in many ways such as:1. When it reenacts statute previously given a contemporaneous construction2. When it amends a prior statute without providing anything which would restrict, change, nullify the previous contemporaneous construction.3. Appropriation of money for the officer designated to perform a task pursuant to an interpretation of a stature4. Non-repudiation of the construction.Note: Ratiohabitio Mandati aequiparatur legislative ratification is equivalent to mandate.