Scribd
Upload
203 views

Casus Omissus - : Week 10

The document discusses legal principles of statutory interpretation including casus omissus, ejusdem generis, inclusio unius, noscitur a sociis, reddendo singular singulis, ube lex non-distinguit. Examples and related case citations are provided for each principle.

Uploaded by

Norvie Joy Panes
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
203 views

Casus Omissus - : Week 10

The document discusses legal principles of statutory interpretation including casus omissus, ejusdem generis, inclusio unius, noscitur a sociis, reddendo singular singulis, ube lex non-distinguit. Examples and related case citations are provided for each principle.

Uploaded by

Norvie Joy Panes
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
You are on page 1/ 2

Week 10 

         

a. Casus Omissus

-a situation omitted from or not provided for by statute or regulation and therefore governed by the common
law.

                 Case: People vs Manantan, GR No. 14129, July 31, 1962

-judges at peace

-section 54 of the Revised Election Code

-The rule of Casus omissus has no applicability to the case at bar for the maxim only applies and operates if and when
the omission has been clearly established.

b. Ejusdem Generis

"of the same kind," used to interpret loosely written statutes. Where a law lists specific classes of persons or things and
then refers to them in general, the general statements only apply to the same kind of persons or things specifically
listed.

-The proposition that Republic Act No. 623protects only the containers of the soft drinks enumerated by petitioner
(CAGAYAN) and those similar thereto, is unwarranted and specious. The rule of ejusdemgeneriscannot be applied in
this case. To limit the coverage of the law only to those enumerated or of the same kind or class as those specifically
mentioned will defeat the very purpose of the law.  (We have to go back to the intention of the framers when they
created RA 623)

-applying only to persons or things of the same kind or class

               Cases: Cagayan Vlley Enterprises, Inc vs CA, GR No. 78413, Nov 8, 1989

                             Republic vs Migrino, GR No. 89483, Aug 30, 1990

c. Inclusio Unios

-a rule of interpretation that states that ‘including one excludes another’

-no contract may a contracting party be obligated to more than what he has really bound himself

                   Cases: Canlas vs Republic, GR No. L- 11305, May 21, 1958

                                Empire Insurance Co. vs Rufino, GR No. 38268, May 31, 1979-

Week 11

d. Noscitur a sociis

unclear or ambiguous word (as in a statute or contract) should be determined by considering the words with
which it is associated in the context.

The correct construction of the word is made clear by the company of words in which it is found

The correct construction of the word is made clear by the company of words in which it is found
                Cases: Magtajas vs Pryce Properties Corp., GR No. 111097, July 20, 1994

                             Carandang vs Santiago, GR No. L-8238, May 25, 1955

No.  The supreme court in its ruling decided in favor of the appellant, the term physical injuries just like the words
defamation and fraud mentioned in the aforementioned article were used in its generic sense.  It does not pertain to
the “physical injury” stated in the Revised Penal Code, since the defendant in his attempt to kill the plaintiff caused
him bodily injury the court deemed it proper for the plaintiff to invoke article 33 of the Civil Code.

e. Reddendo singular singulis

Reddendo singula singulis is a Latin term that means by referring each to each; referring each phrase or
expression to its corresponding object. It is a rule of construction used typically in distributing property.

                   Cases: Amadora vs CA, GR No. L-47745, Apr 15, 1988

Following the canon ofreddendo singula singulis "teachers" should apply to the words "pupils and students" and "heads
of establishments of arts and trades" to the word "apprentices."

                                People vs Tamani, GR No. 22160, Jan 21, 1974

That construction is sanctioned by the rule of reddendo singula singulis: "referring each to each; referring each phrase
or expression to its appropriate object", or "let each be put in its proper place, that is, the words should be taken
distributively".

f. Ube lex non-distinguit

Where the law does not distinguish, neither should we distinguish

                   Cases: Guerrero vs COMELEC, GR No. 137004, July 26, 2000

                                Peralta vs CSC, GR No. 95832, Aug 10, 1992

1. .A general word followed by exceptions therefrom implies that those which does not fall under the exceptions come
within the scope of the general expression.

2. A person or object omitted from an enumeration are held to be omitted intentionally.. Single choice.
(2 Points)

General & special terms

it must be taken as established that where words are used which have both a restricted and a general meaning, the
general must prevail over the restricted unless the nature of the subject matter of the context clearly indicates that the
limited sense is intended." 

You might also like