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.