G.R. No.

138298, June 19, 2001

Such strained interpretation violates the rule of statutory construction that no
limitation is to be inferred or implied which would have the effect of defeating the
object of the law.
Dissenting Melo:A law should be interpreted with a view to upholding rather than
destroying it. One portion of a statute should not be construed to destroy the
other. A construction that would render a provision inoperative or ineffective
should be avoided.
G.R. No. 147066, March 26, 2001
Truly in the interpretation of statutes the interpretation to be given must be such
that it is in accordance with logic common sense reasonableness and practicality
!udimentary is the principle in legal hermeneutics that changes made by the
legislature in the form of amendments to a statute should be given effect
together with other parts of the amended act. "t is not to be presumed that the
legislature in ma#ing such changes was indulging in mere semantic e$ercise.
There must be some purpose in ma#ing them which should be ascertained and
given effect.%&'Agpalo Statutory (onstruction )Third *dition+ ,&&- p. .// citing
0alde1 v. Tuason 23 4hil. &2. %,&/3' and other cases
Asturias Sugar (entral "nc. v. (ommissioner of (ustoms 5o. 67,&..8
September .3 ,&9& /& S(!A 9,8 9/8
6i#ewise in interpretating a statute the (ourt should start with the assumption
that the legislature intended to enact an effective law: it cannot be presumed to
have done a vain thing.%/;
G.R. No. 168056, September 01, 2005
Therefore no statutory construction or interpretation is needed. 5either can
conditions or limitations be introduced where none is provided for. !ewriting the
law is a forbidden ground that only (ongress may tread upon.%93'(ommission on
"nternal !evenue vs. American *$press "nternational "nc. )4hilippine <ranch+
=.!. 5o. ,-/93& >une /& /33-
G.R. NO. 137534, August 03, 2006
A rule of statutory construction is that a statute must be construed as a whole.
The meaning of the law is not to be e$tracted from a single part portion or
section or from isolated words and phrases clauses or sentences but from a
general consideration or view of the act as a whole. *very part of the statute
must be interpreted with reference to the conte$t.%,/' "n line with this rule the
(ourt finds that Section 9-?s notice of delin@uency should be read in line with the
Section 98?s statement that the different ta$ remedies do not re@uire a formal
demand for the payment but may be substituted by the notice of delin@uency.
!eference to the notice of delin@uency in relation to ta$ remedies in general
illustrates the former?s function as a prere@uisite to all the individual ta$ remedies
subse@uently detailed. Also the phrase Anotice of delin@uency as re@uired in
Section si$ty7fiveA found on the last part of Section 98 further underscores its
mandatory nature and interrelation to the three remedies.
G.R. No. 106588, March 24, 1997
"t is a familiar rule in statutory construction that A)t+he legal provision being
therefore susceptible of two interpretations we adopt the one in consonance with
the presumed intention of the legislature to give its enactments the most
reasonable and beneficial construction the one that will render them operative
and effective and harmonious with other provisions of law.A%.3'>avellana vs.
Tayo 9 S(!A ,32/ ,3-3 December /& ,&9/.
DOB<6* >*O4A!DC
G.R. No. 164577, Ju!" 05, 2010 #
4etitioner attempts to justify its position by relying on our pronouncement in
4eople v. 0illalon%,9' which reads:,&/ S(!A -/, recited in 4etitioner?s
Memorandum !ollo p. 2/2
As a general rule the dismissal or termination of the case after
arraignment and plea of the defendant to a valid information shall be a
bar to another prosecution for the offense charged or for any attempt
to commit the same or frustration thereof or for any offense which
necessarily includes or is necessarily included in the complaint or
information. Dowever an appeal by the prosecution from the order of
dismissal )of the criminal case+ by the trial court shall not constitute
double jeopardy if ),+ the dismissal is made upon motion or with the
e$press consent of the defendant and )/+ the dismissal is not an
ac@uittal or based upon consideration of the evidence or of the merits of
the case: and ).+ the @uestion to be passed upon by the appellate court
is purely legal so that should the dismissal be found incorrect the case
would have to be remanded to the court of origin for further
proceedings to determine the guilt or innocence of the defendant.
)emphasis supplied+