Lawyerly

You're currently signed in as:
User

ROQUE SENARILLOS v. EPIPANIO HERMOSISIMA

This case has been cited 3 times or more.

	GR No. 190102 2012-07-11	ACCENTURE v. CIR SERENO, J.
Moreover, even though Accenture's Petition was filed before Burmeister was promulgated, the pronouncements made in that case may be applied to the present one without violating the rule against retroactive application. When this Court decides a case, it does not pass a new law, but merely interprets a preexisting one.[42] When this Court interpreted Section 102(b) of the 1977 Tax Code in Burmeister, this interpretation became part of the law from the moment it became effective. It is elementary that the interpretation of a law by this Court constitutes part of that law from the date it was originally passed, since this Court's construction merely establishes the contemporaneous legislative intent that the interpreted law carried into effect.[43]
	GR No. 176951 2009-12-21	LEAGUE OF CITIES OF PHILIPPINES v. COMELEC VELASCO JR., J.
The legislative intent is not at all times accurately reflected in the manner in which the resulting law is couched. Thus, applying a verba legis[37] or strictly literal interpretation of a statute may render it meaningless and lead to inconvenience, an absurd situation or injustice.[38] To obviate this aberration, and bearing in mind the principle that the intent or the spirit of the law is the law itself,[39] resort should be to the rule that the spirit of the law controls its letter.[40]
	GR No. 176951 2008-11-18	LEAGUE OF CITIES OF PHILIPPINES v. COMELEC CARPIO, J.
(c) The average annual income shall include the income accruing to the general fund, exclusive of special funds, transfers, and non-recurring income. (Underscoring supplied) What Congress had in mind is not at all times accurately reflected in the language of the statute. Thus, the literal interpretation of a statute may render it meaningless; and lead to absurdity, injustice, or contradiction.[105] When this happens, and following the rule that the intent or the spirit of the law is the law itself,[106] resort should be had to the principle that the spirit of the law controls its letter.[107] Not to the letter that killeth, but to the spirit that vivifieth. Hindi ang letra na pumapatay, kung hindi ang diwa na nagbibigay buhay.