Lawyerly

You're currently signed in as:
User

SINGAPORE AIRLINES LOCAL EMPLOYEES ASSOCIATION v. NLRC

This case has been cited 2 times or more.

	GR No. 171153 2007-09-12	SAN MIGUEL CORPORATION EMPLOYEES UNION—PHILIPPINE TRANSPORT v. SAN MIGUEL PACKAGING PRODUCTS EMPLOYEES UNION—PAMBANSANG DIWA NG MANGGAGAWANG PILIPINO CHICO-NAZARIO, J.
This Court deems it proper to apply the Latin maxim expressio unius est exclusio alterius. Under this maxim of statutory interpretation, the expression of one thing is the exclusion of another. When certain persons or things are specified in a law, contract, or will, an intention to exclude all others from its operation may be inferred. If a statute specifies one exception to a general rule or assumes to specify the effects of a certain provision, other exceptions or effects are excluded.[55] Where the terms are expressly limited to certain matters, it may not, by interpretation or construction, be extended to other matters.[56] Such is the case here. If its intent were otherwise, the law could have so easily and conveniently included "trade union centers" in identifying the labor organizations allowed to charter a chapter or local. Anything that is not included in the enumeration is excluded therefrom, and a meaning that does not appear nor is intended or reflected in the very language of the statute cannot be placed therein.[57] The rule is restrictive in the sense that it proceeds from the premise that the legislating body would not have made specific enumerations in a statute if it had the intention not to restrict its meaning and confine its terms to those expressly mentioned.[58] Expressium facit cessare tacitum.[59] What is expressed puts an end to what is implied. Casus omissus pro omisso habendus est. A person, object or thing omitted must have been omitted intentionally.
	GR NO. 147749 2006-06-22	SAN PABLO MANUFACTURING CORPORATION v. CIR CORONA, J.
Where the law enumerates the subject or condition upon which it applies, it is to be construed as excluding from its effects all those not expressly mentioned. Expressio unius est exclusio alterius. Anything that is not included in the enumeration is excluded therefrom and a meaning that does not appear nor is intended or reflected in the very language of the statute cannot be placed therein.[20] The rule proceeds from the premise that the legislature would not have made specific enumerations in a statute if it had the intention not to restrict its meaning and confine its terms to those expressly mentioned.[21]