[statcon] Chapter-7-statutes-liberally-construed.pdf

PADERAYON, Adrian A. 1E

STATUTES LIBERALLY CONSTRUED

I.

General social legislation These are statutes which have been enacted to implement the social justice and protection-to-labor provisions of the Constitution. Examples of which are labor laws, tenancy laws, land reform laws, and social security laws. They shall be construed in favor of those intended to be benefited. However, this principle holds only when there is doubt or ambiguity in the law and not when the law is clear and free from doubt. Asian Transmission Corp. v. CA GR No 144664, March 15,2004 FACTS: Department of Labor and Employment issued an explanatory bulletin dated March 11, 1993 where it clarified that employees are entitled to 200% of their basic wage on April 9, 1993 which is apart from being Good Friday is also Araw ng Kagitingan which are both legal holidays. Said bulletin was reproduced on January 23, 1998 when April 9 is both Araw ng Kagitingan and Maundy Thursday. Despite the explanatory bulletin, Asian Transmission Corp. opted to pay its daily-paid employees only 100% of their basic pay. Bisig Asian Transmission Labor Union (BATLU), the respondent, protested. The controversy was then submitted for voluntary arbitration in pursuance to the procedure of Collective Bargaining Agreement existing between BATLU and Asian Transmission Corp. The Office of the Voluntary Arbitrator rendered a decision that covers all employees to be paid 200% of their basic pay. The Court of Appeals affirmed with the decision rendered by the Office of Voluntary Arbitrator. The Collective Bargaining Agreement which governs relations between them that Araw ng Kagitingan and Holy Maundy, in whatever date they may fall in the calendar year, are considered legal holidays and be paid accordingly and that there is no condition, qualification or exception for any variance from the clear intent that all holidays shall be compensated. The Court of Appeals further held that "in the absence of an explicit provision in law which provides for reduction of holiday pay if two holidays happen to fall on the same day, any doubt in the interpretation and implementation of the Labor Code provisions on holiday pay must be resolved in favor of labor Hence, this petition. ISSUE:

Whether or not the daily-paid employees are entitled to be paid for two regular holidays HELD: Yes. Holiday pay is a legislated benefit enacted as part of the Constitutional imperative that the State shall afford protection to labor. Art. 94 of Labor Code affords a worker the enjoyment of ten paid regular holidays. The provision is mandatory, regardless of whether an employee is paid on a monthly or daily basis. Since a worker is entitled to the enjoyment of ten paid regular holidays, the fact that two holidays fall on the same date should not operate to reduce to nine the ten-holiday pay benefits a worker is entitled to receive. It is elementary, under the rules of statutory construction, that when the language of the law is clear and unequivocal, the law must be taken to mean exactly what it says. In the case at bar, there is nothing in the law which provides or indicates that the entitlement to ten days of holiday pay shall be reduced to nine when two holidays fall on the same day. Wherefore, the petition is dismissed.

II.

General welfare clause A provision in a municipal charter whereby a municipal corporation, by virtue of its police power, may adopt ordinances to secure the peace, safety, health, morals and the best and highest interest of the entity (Case v. Board of Health, 24 Phil 252). It should be construed liberally in favor of the local government units. In case of doubt, it should be interpreted to give more powers to local governments in promoting the economic condition, social welfare, and material progress of the people in the community. General welfare clause is elastic and must be responsive to various social conditions.

III.

Grant of power to local governments Local Government Code provides for allocation to local government units such powers, responsibilities, and resources and providing for their qualifications, elections and removal, terms, salaries, powers, functions and duties and operation of local units, and empowered local government units to create its own sources of revenue and to levy taxes, subject to limitations as may be provided by law. Ortigas & Co., Ltd. V. Feati Bank & Trust Co G.R. No. L-24670, December 14, 1979 FACTS: Plaintiff is engaged in real estate business, developing and selling lots to the public, particularly the Highway Hills Subdivision along Epifanio de los Santos Avenue, Mandaluyong, Rizal. On March 4, 1952, plaintiff, as vendor, and Augusto Padilla y Angeles and Natividad Angeles, as vendees, entered into separate agreements of sale on installments over two parcels of land, known as Lots Nos. 5 and 6, Block 31, of the Highway Hills Subdivision, situated at Mandaluyong, Rizal. On July 19, 1962, the said

vendees transferred their rights and interests over the aforesaid lots in favor of one Emma Chavez. Upon completion of payment of the purchase price, the plaintiff executed the corresponding deeds of sale in favor of Emma Chavez. Both the agreements (of sale on installment) and the deeds of sale contained the stipulations or restrictions that the parcel of land subject of this deed of sale shall be used by the buyer exclusively for residential purposes, and she shall not be entitled to take or remove soil, stones or gravel from it or any other lots belonging to the seller. Eventually, defendant-appellee acquired Lots Nos. 5 and 6. Defendant-appellee began laying the foundation and commenced the construction of a building on Lots Nos. 5 and 6, to be devoted to banking purposes, but which defendant-appellee claims could also be devoted to, and used exclusively for, residential purposes. The following day, plaintiffappellant demanded in writing that defendant-appellee stop the construction of the commercial building on the said lots for there has been a stipulation that the parcel of land should only be used for residential purposes. However, Defendant-appellee, upon the other hand, maintains that the area along the western part of Epifanio de los Santos Avenue (EDSA) from Shaw Boulevard to Pasig River, has been declared a commercial and industrial zone, per Resolution No. 27, dated February 4, 1960 of the Municipal Council of Mandaluyong, Rizal. ISSUE: Whether or not Resolution 27 be enforced considering the contract stipulation HELD: Yes. Section 3 of R.A. No. 2264, otherwise known as the Local Autonomy Act, empowers a Municipal Council "to adopt zoning and subdivision ordinances or regulations" for the municipality. Clearly, the law does not restrict the exercise of the power through an ordinance. Therefore, granting that Resolution No. 27 is not an ordinance, it certainly is a regulatory measure within the intendment or ambit of the word "regulation" under the provision. An examination of Section 12 of the same law which prescribes the rules for its interpretation likewise reveals that the implied power of a municipality should be "liberally construed in its favor" and that "any fair and reasonable doubt as to the existence of the power should be interpreted in favor of the local government and it shall be presumed to exist." The same section further mandates that the general welfare clause be liberally interpreted in case of doubt, so as to give more power to local governments in promoting the economic conditions, social welfare and material progress of the people in the community.

IV.

Statutes granting taxing power The Constitution provides that each local government unit shall have the power to create its own sources of revenue and to levy taxes, fees, and charges subject to such guidelines and limitations as the Congress may provide, consistent with the basic policy of local autonomy. The clear implication of this provision is that statutes prescribing limitations on the taxing power of local government units must be strictly construed against the national government and liberally in favor of the local government units, and any doubt as to the existence of facing power will be resolved in favor of the local government.

V.

Statutes prescribing prescriptive period to collect taxes In favor of both government and citizens since tax officers will act promptly in making assessments; and citizens because after the lapse of period of prescription, citizens would have a feeling of security against unscrupulous tax agents who will always find an excuse to inspect books of taxpayer to molest peaceful and law-abiding citizens. It should be interpreted liberally to bring protection to taxpayers.

VI.

Statutes imposing penalties for nonpayment of tax Shall be construed in favor of the government and observed against taxpayer. Such laws are intended to hasten tax payments or punish evasions or neglect of duty in respect thereto. Jamora v. Meer G.R. No. 48129, November 11, 1942, 74 PHIL 22-22 FACTS: On September 15, 1938, defendant Collector of Internal Revenue served on plaintiffs Celso B. Jamora and his spouse Asuncion M. Jamora, an assessment notice wherein they were required to pay, not later than October 15, 1938, the inheritance tax of P2,092.56 on the estate of the late Francisco Magno. The payment of the aforesaid tax was suspended, and, after the termination of said proceedings, plaintiffs received on February 20, 1939, the second inheritance tax assessment notice requiring them to pay the sum of P2,047.10 on or before March 20, 1939. Plaintiffs sent, by registered mail, their check for the payment of this amount after 4 o'clock in the afternoon of March 20, 1939, which payment was received by the defendant in the morning of March 21, 1939. Thus delayed, defendant required plaintiffs to pay a surcharge of 25 per cent on the aforesaid amount and 1 per cent monthly interest thereon for one day, or a total of P510.22. Plaintiffs paid under protest and sought recovery for the amount. ISSUE: Whether or not the petitioner be liable of evasion of tax

HELD: It is not disputed that plaintiffs' remittance was deposited in the mail after the closing hours of March 20, 1939. Under Executive Order No. 92, series of 1927, "a tax payer who makes a remittance through the mails of either money order, cash or check covering a tax due from him should be considered delinquent and subject to the payment of a surcharge or statutory penalty . . . where it cannot be proven that the remittance was deposited in the mails in ample time to reach the office of the tax collector on or before the close of office hours on the last day for the payment of the tax." Strong reasons of policy support a strict observance of this rule. Tax laws imposing penalties for delinquencies are clearly intended to hasten tax payments or to punish evasions or neglect of duty in respect thereof. If delays in tax payments are to be condoned for light reasons, the law imposing penalties for delinquencies would be rendered nugatory, and the maintenance of the government and its multifarious activities would be as precarious as tax payers are willing or unwilling to pay their obligations to the state in time. The imperatives of public welfare will not approve of this result.