GR No. 215427

PAGCOR vs Bureau of Internal Revenue

GR No. 215427

Facts:

PAGCOR has been excluded from the enumeration of government-owned or controlled corporations that are exempted from the liability for corporate income tax. This has been observed with the RA No 9337 as it amends Section 27 (c) of RA No. 8424 otherwise known as the National Internal Revenue Code (NIRC).

Issue:

Whether or not PAGCOR is liable for the corporate income tax that the conflicting statutes implement.

Held:

There is no conflict between PD 1869 and RA No 9337.The former lays down the taxes imposable upon petitioner, as follows: (1) a five percent (5%) franchise tax of the gross revenues or earnings derived from its operations conducted under the Franchise, which shall be due and payable in lieu of all kinds of taxes, levies, fees or assessments of any kind, nature or description, levied, established or collected by any municipal, provincial or national government authority;15 (2) income tax for income realized from other necessary and related services, shows and entertainment of petitioner.16 With the enactment of R.A. No. 9337, which withdrew the income tax exemption under R.A. No. 8424, petitioner’s tax liability on income from other related services was merely reinstated.

It is a rule that every effort must be exerted to avoid a conflict between statutes; so that if reasonable construction is possible, the laws must be reconciled in that manner. Also, it shall also be borne in mind that it is a canon of statutory construction that a special law prevails over a general law — regardless of their dates of passage — and the special is to be considered as remaining an exception to the general.

GR No. 191894

Danilo Duncano vs Sandiganbayan

GR No. 191894

Facts:

Duncano was a high ranking public officer being the Regional Director of Revenue Region No. 7. He has failed to disclose in his SALN the financial and business interests that he and his family are registered owners. Such non-disclosure may damage and prejudice the public interest.

Issue:

Whether or not the Sandiganbayan has the jurisdiction to try Duncano of the case filed against him.

Held:

Yes, Sandiganbayan does not have the jurisdiction to try Duncano. The Sandiganbayan can only have such when violations of Section 3 (a) and (e) of RA No 3019 are committed by public officials and employees occupying positions of regional director and higher salary with Salary Grade 27 or higher.

As a cardinal rule in statutory construction, particular words, clauses, and phrases should not be studied as detached and isolated expressions, but the whole and every part of the statute must be considered in fixing the meaning of any of its parts, in order to produce a harmonious whole.

GR No. 154213

Eastern Mediterranean Maritime Ltd. and Agemar Manning Agency, Inc. vs Estanislao Surio, et al

GR No. 154213

Facts:

MT Seadance is a vessel owned by Eastern Mediterranean Maritime Ltd and manned and operated by Agemar Manning Agency. The same was not in a good working condition and the payment of wages, remittance of allotments, as well as the payment for extra work and extra overtime work were delayed. As MT Seadance docked at a port in Sweden, representatives of International Transport Federation boarded the same. They have found out that wages of its crew members were below the prevailing rates. As a result, they have moved to increase the wages of the said crewmembers. On Dec 23, 1993, the petitioners filed a complaint against the crew members and claimed reimbursement for the increase of wages received.

Issue:

Whether or not it is under the jurisdiction of NLRC to review cases on appeal decided by POEA.

Held:

No, the NLRC has no jurisdiction to review an appeal case decided by POEA. According to Section 28 (b) of the Omnibus Rules and Regulations Implementing the Migrant Workers and Overseas Filipinos Act of 1995, the POEA shall exercise original and exclusive jurisdiction to hear and decide disciplinary action cases and other special cases, which are administrative in character, involving employers, principals, contracting partners and Filipino migrant workers. Since RA No 8042 has been passed into a law after the filing of charges by the petitioner to the respondents, the rule on retroactivity of the laws shall be observed.

As a rule, all laws are prospective in application unless the contrary is expressly provided, or unless the law is procedural or curative in nature. Thus, such law stating that the POEA has the jurisdiction to decide on disciplinary cases shall be observed in the case at bar.

G.R. No. 201043

Republic vs Daisy Yahon

G.R. No. 201043

Facts:

Sgt Yahon was married to respondent. A TPO has been issued against Sgt Yahon to protect the respondent from further abuses. In the TPO, Sgt Yahon was ordered to provide reasonable financial spousal support to the respondent. In his failure to appear before the court with a counsel and with an answer to the charges against him, the court has granted PPO for the respondent against Sgt Yahon. It was also reiterated that Sgt Yahon should provide for the financial spousal support to his wife from his retirement benefits. However, the Armed Forces of the Philippines Finance Center contended that half of the retirement benefits of Sgt Yahon cannot be given to the respondent as it is from a military institution. The petitioner contended that money due to government employees is not liable to the creditors of the said employees in the process of garnishment.

Issue:

Whether or not the retirement benefits of Sgt Yahon be subject to the ruling of the court to provide for the financial spousal support of respondent.

Held:

Retirement benefits of Sgt Yahon are subject to the financial spousal support of respondent. As a rule in statutory construction, when the law does not distinguish, the court should not distinguish. As section 8 (g) of RA No. 9262 used the general term 'employer', it includes in its coverage the military institution, which is the employer of Sgt Yahon.

G.R. No. 193960

Dabalos vs. RTC Branch 59 of Angeles City, Pampanga

G.R. No. 193960

Facts:

Dabalos had willfully, unlawfully, and feloniously used personal violence against the complainant whom he had a dating relationship with. The said violence constituted the pulling of hair, punching the complainant's back, shoulder, and left eye which have demeaning and degrading effects on the complainant's intrinsic worth and dignity as a human being, in violation of Section 5 (a) of the Republic Act 9262. In Dabalos' defense, he averred that the relationship had already ceased at the time of the alleged incident.

Issue:

Whether or not RA 9262 be construed when the dating relationship was not the proximate cause of the violence?

Held:

Yes. The law provides that any act can be considered as a crime of violence against women through physical harm when it is committed against a woman or her child and the woman is the offender's wife, former wife, or with whom he has or had sexual or dating relationship or with whom he has a common child, and when it results in or is likely to result in physical harm or suffering.

Applying the rule on statutory construction that when the law does not distinguish, neither should the courts, the punishable acts refer to all acts of violence against women with whom the offender has or had a sexual or dating relationship. It did not distinguish that the act of violence should be a consequence of such relationship.

G.R. No. 79094

Manolo Fule vs. Honorable Court of Appeals

G.R. No. 79094

Facts:

Manolo Fule has been accused and convicted of the Violation of Batas Pambansa Blg 22 (The Bouncing Checks Law) on the basis of the Stipulation of Facts.

Issue:

Whether or not the court has erred in its ruling.

Held:

Yes, the court has erred in its ruling. According to Sec 4 of the 1985 Rules on Criminal Procedure, pre-trial agreements must be signed. It provides that no agreement or admission made or entered during the pre-trial conference shall be used in evidence against the accused unless reduced to writing and signed by him and his counsel.

Using the rule of statutory construction, negative words and phrases are to be regarded as mandatory while those in the affirmative are merely directory. The use of the term 'shall' further emphasizes its mandatory character and means that it is imperative, operating to impose a duty which may be enforced.

G.R. No. L-5387

Clyde McGee vs. Republic

G.R. No. L-5387

Facts:

Crisostomo has two minors from her previous marriage. Since the same has ceased because of the death of her first husband, she was allowed to be married to McGee. McGee is an American citizen and contracted marriage with Crisostomo by whom he has one child. He wanted to adopt his two minor children.

Issue:

WON it is legal and valid for McGee to adopt the two minor children of Crisostomo.

Held:

No, McGee cannot adopt the said children. According to Art 335 of the Civil Code, the following cannot adopt: those who have legitimate, legitimated, acknowledged natural children, or natural children by legal fiction. Further, Art 338 of the same Code provides that the following may be adopted: a step-child, by the step-father or step-mother.

According to the rule of statutory construction, negative words and phrases are to be regarded as mandatory while those in the affirmative are merely directory. To this end, Art 335 means that a step-father who already has a child may not adopt a step-child regardless of the provisions of Art 338 of the same Code.

G.R. No. 206248

Grace Grande vs Patricio Antonio

G.R. No. 206248

Facts:

Grande and Antonio had an illicit relationship. Out of it was born two children. Antonio did not expressly recognize the illegitimate children. He wanted to have the children use his surname.

Issue:

Whether or not it is legal to let the illegitimate children use Antonio surname even when they were not expressly recognized by the father.

Held:

The case was reprimanded to the RTC.

However, according to Article 176 of the Family Code which was amended by RA 9255 Illegitimate children shall use the surname and shall be under the parental authority of their mother, and shall be entitled to support in conformity with this Code. However, illegitimate children may use the surname of their father if their filiation has been expressly recognized by their father through the record of birth appearing in the civil register, or when an admission in a public document or private handwritten instrument is made by the father. Provided, the father has the right to institute an action before the regular courts to prove non-filiation during his lifetime. The legitime of each illegitimate child shall consist of one-half of the legitime of a legitimate child.

According to the rule on statutory construction, the use of 'may' is permissive and operates to confer discretion. In applying the same to the case at bar, the use of the word 'may' in the provision readily shows that an acknowledged illegitimate child is under no compulsion to use the surname of his illegitimate father.

G.R. No. 190809

De La Salle Araneta University vs Juanito Bernardo

G.R. No. 190809

Facts:

Bernardo has been a part-time employee of the DLS-AU. At the age of 65, the age of retirement, Bernardo was granted another term of employment. Bernardo's contract with the university only ceased when he reached the age of 75, the compulsory retirement age. He asserts his right to claim his retirement benefits.

Issue:

Whether or not Bernardo is entitled to the retirement benefits.

Held:

Bernardo is entitled to the retirement benefits. According to Article 302 of the Labor Code, as amended by RA No 7641, any employee may be retired upon reaching the retirement age and that he shall be entitled to receive retirement benefits under the existing laws. Further, according to section 1 of Book VI Rule 2 of the Rules Implementing the Labor Code, the same rule shall apply to all employees in the private sector, regardless of their position, designation or status and irrespective of the method by which their wages are paid, except to those specifically exempted under Section 2 hereof. The exemptions do not cover the part-time employees.

Applying the principle of expressio unio est expulsio alterius which is that the express mention of one person, thing, or consequence implies the exclusion of all others, Bernardo's claim for retirement benefits cannot be denied on the ground that he was a part-time employee.

G.R. No. 202789

CIR vs Puregold Duty Free Inc

G.R. No. 202789

Facts:

Issue:

Whether or not Puregold Duty Free is liable for deficiency VAT and excise tax for its importation of distilled spirits, wines, and cigarettes.

Held:

No, Puregold Duty Free is not liable for deficiency VAT and excise tax as it has properly availed of the tax amnesty under RA 9399.  under R.A. 9399 when it provides that "registered business enterprises operation prior to the effectivity of this Act within the special economic zones and freeports created pursuant to Section 15 of Republic Act No. 7227, as amended, such as the Clark Special Economic Zone created under Proclamation No. 163, series of 1993, xxx may avail themselves of the benefits of remedial tax amnesty herein granted on all applicable tax and duty liabilities, inclusive of fines, penalties, interest and other additions.

Applying the principle of expressio unio est expulsio alterius which means that the express mention of one person, thing, act, or consequence excludes all others, Puregold Duty Free is entitled and has properly availed of the tax amnesty.

G.R. No. 179431-32

Luis Lokin, Jr vs COMELEC

G.R. No. 179431-32

Facts:

Prior to election, the following representatives have been nominated on March 29, 2007: Villanueva, Lokin Jr, Cinchona, Cruz-Gonzales, Tugna, and Galang. However, Villanueva has filed a certificate of nomination, substitution and amendment of the list of nominees dated May 7, 2007.

Issue:

Whether or not Section 13 of Resolution No. 7804 valid.

Held:

No, Section 13 of Resolution No. 7804 is invalid and of no effect. Withdrawing a nomination of a nominee of a party-list organization once it has submitted the nomination to the Commission on Elections is invalid. Although, there are exceptions to this rule.

When the statute itself enumerates the exceptions to the application of the general rule, the exceptions are strictly but reasonably construed. The exceptions extend only as far as their language fairly warrants, and all doubts should be resolved in favor of the general provision rather than the exceptions. Where the general rule is established by a statute with exceptions, none but the enacting authority can curtail the former. Not even the courts may add to the latter by implication, and it is a rule that an express exception excludes all others, although it is always proper in determining the applicability of the rule to inquire whether, in a particular case, it accords with reason and justice.[39]

The appropriate and natural office of the exception is to exempt something from the scope of the general words of a statute, which is otherwise within the scope and meaning of such general words. Consequently, the existence of an exception in a statute clarifies the intent that the statute shall apply to all cases not excepted. Exceptions are subject to the rule of strict construction; hence, any doubt will be resolved in favor of the general provision and against the exception. Indeed, the liberal construction of a statute will seem to require in many circumstances that the exception, by which the operation of the statute is limited or abridged, should receive a restricted construction.

G.R. No. 188635

Brenda Nazareth vs Hon. Reynaldo Villar, et al

G.R. No. 188635

Facts:

Nazareth, the Regional Director of the Department of Science and Technology in the Region IX, has approved the release of Magna Carta benefits to the covered officials and employees commencing 1998, 1999, and 2001. The said appropriation has no provision in the GAA, which means that it has not been officially approved yet.

Issue:

Whether or not the release of the Magna Carta funds for 1998, 1999, and 2001 qualified officials and employees legal and valid.

Held:

It is not valid but the officials and employees do not have to reimburse the disallowed allowance. According to Section 25 (5) Article IV of the Constitution, the President, the President of the Senate, the Speaker of the House of Representatives, the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court, and the heads of Constitutional Commissions are authorized to transfer appropriations to augment any item in the GAA for their respective offices in their respective appropriations.

When the statute itself enumerates the exceptions to the application of the general rule, the exceptions are strictly but reasonably construed. The exceptions extend only as far as their language fairly warrants, and all doubts should be resolved in favor of the general provision rather than the exceptions. Where the general rule is established by a statute with exceptions, none but the enacting authority can curtail the former. Not even the courts may add to the latter by implication, and it is a rule that an express exception excludes all others, although it is always proper in determining the applicability of the rule to inquire whether, in a particular case, it accords with reason and justice.

The appropriate and natural office of the exception is to exempt something from the scope of the general words of a statute, which is otherwise within the scope and meaning of such general words. Consequently, the existence of an exception in a statute clarifies the intent that the statute shall apply to all cases not excepted. Exceptions are subject to the rule of strict construction; hence, any doubt will be resolved in favor of the general provision and against the exception. Indeed, the liberal construction of a statute will seem to require in many circumstances that the exception, by which the operation of the statute is limited or abridged, should receive a restricted construction.

G. R. No. 207843

CIR vs Court of Tax Appeals and Petron Corp

G. R. No. 207843

Facts:

Petron is engaged in the manufacture and marketing of petroleum products, imports alkalyte as a raw material or blending component for the manufacture of ethanol-blended motor gasoline. The CIR has ruled that alkalyte is exempt from the payment of the excise tax because it was not among those articles enumerated as subject to excise tax under the Title VI of the Republic Act No. 8424 or the 1997 NIRC.

Issue:

Whether or not it is under the jurisdiction of the CIR to interpret tax laws.

Held:

Yes, it is under the jurisdiction of CIR to interpret tax laws. According to Section 4 of the Tax Code, on the Power of the Commissioner to Interpret Tax Laws and to Decide Tax Cases. The power to interpret the provisions of this Code and other tax laws shall be under the exclusive and original jurisdiction of the Commissioner, subject to review by the Secretary of Finance.

The power to decide disputed assessments, refunds or internal revenue taxes, fees and other charges, penalties imposed in relation thereto, or other matters arising under this Code or other laws or portions thereof administered by the Bureau of Internal Revenue is vested in the commissioner, subject to the exclusive appellate jurisdiction of the Court of Tax Appeals.

Applying the principle of ejusdem generis, the phrase 'other matters arising under this Code' should be interpreted as of the same nature as those that have preceded them. As such, the CIR was correct in its interpretation of Section 148 (e) of the NIRC to include alkalyte among the articles subject to customs duties, as it is provided in the first paragraph of Section 4 that the interpretation of the same is under the original jurisdiction of the CIR.

G.R. No. 180235

Alta Vista Golf and Country Club vs City of Cebu

G.R. No. 180235

Facts:

A golf course has been operated in the city of Cebu for 5 years already. The local government has promulgated a law for imposing tax on amusement places in their jurisdiction.

Issue:

WON golf course is to be considered an amusement place

Held:

Golf course cannot be considered as an amusement place and is therefore not subject to amusement tax. According to Section 140 of the Local Government Code on amusement tax, the province may levy an amusement tax to be collected from the proprietors, lessees, or operators of theaters, cinemas, concert halls, circuses, boxing stadia, and other places of amusement

In applying the principle of ejusdem generis, where a general word or phrase follows an enumeration of particular and specific words of the same class or where the latter follows the former, the general word or phrase is to be construed to include, or to be restricted to persons, things or cases akin to, resembling, or of the same kind or class as those specifically mentioned. A golf course is not similar to that of the expressly provided amusement places as it cannot be considered as an amusement place in itself. An amusement place is defined as a place where people enter to witness a show or a performance.

G.R. No. 184317

Metropolitan Bank and Trust Company vs Liberty Corrugated Boxes Manufacturing Corporation

G.R. No. 184317

Facts:

Liberty has filed a petition for rehabilitation. The rehabilitation plan consisted of debt moratorium, renewal of marketing efforts, resumption of operations, and entry into condominium development which is a new business. The Metro bank argued that Liberty was not qualified for corporate rehabilitation and that the rehabilitation plan by Liberty was defective and not feasible.

Issue:

Whether or not Liberty may file a petition for rehabilitation.

Held:

Yes, a corporation with debts that have already matured may still file a petition for rehabilitation under the Interim Rules of Procedure on Corporation Rehabilitation. According to Rule 4 Section 1 of Interim Rules, Any debtor who foresees the impossibility of meeting its debts when they respectively fall due, or any creditor or creditors holding at least twenty-five percent (25%) of the debtor's total liabilities, may petition the proper Regional Trial Court to have the debtor placed under rehabilitation.

Applying the principle of noscitur a socii, a particular word or phrase is ambiguous in itself or is equally susceptible of various meanings, its correct construction may be made clear and specific by considering the company of words in which it is founded or which it is associated. In this case, the phrase "any debtor who foresees the impossibility of meeting its debts when they respectively fall due", need not refer to a specific period or point in time when the debts mature.

G.R. No. 220953

Gloria Macapagal Arroyo vs People and Sandiganbayan

G.R. No. 220953

Facts:

Gloria Arroyo was accused of committing plunder. The case was dismissed by the court.

Issue:

Whether or not the court has erred in dismissing the case

Held:

No, the court was correct in its ruling. According to the Section 1 (d) of RA No 7080, Ill-gotten wealth means any asset, prope1iy, business enterprise or material possession of any person within the purview of Section Two (2) hereof, acquired by him directly or indirectly through dummies, nominees, agents, subordinates and/or business associates by any combination or series of the following means or similar schemes:

1) Through misappropriation, conversion, misuse, or malversation of public funds or raids on the public treasury.

In applying the principle noscitur a sociis which is that the correct construction of a particular word or phrase that is ambiguous in itself or is equally susceptible of various meanings may be made by considering the company of the words in which the word or phrase is found or with which it is associated, raids on the public treasury requires the raider to use the property taken impliedly for his personal benefit.

As a result, the court was correct in its ruling as the not only did the Prosecution fail to show where the money went but, more importantly, that GMA and Aguas had personally benefited from the same. Hence, the Prosecution did not prove the predicate act of raids on the public treasury beyond reasonable doubt.

G.R. No. 190834

Ariel T. Lim v. People of the Philippines

G.R. No. 190834

Facts:

Lim issued two checks payable to cash to Baddie for the printing materials. Due to the delay in the delivery of the said materials, Lim issued a “Stop Payment” order for the two checks. However, the checks were drawn against insufficient funds. Lim was not able to arrange payments with Baddie within five banking days after receiving notice of the said error. Although, Lim was able to give the full payment for the materials after a lapse of more than one month.

Issue:

Whether or not Lim has committed estafa.

Held:

No. It must be noted that Lim has already paid in full the amount of the dishonored checks six months before the information was filed. In doing so, he was exonerated from the imposition of penalties for violation of BP bilang 22. It is a consistent rule that penal statutes are construed strictly against the State and liberally in favor of the accused. Since penal laws should not be applied mechanically, the Court must determine whether the application of the penal law is consistent with the purpose and reason of the law.