CHAPTER NINE:
Prospective and
Retroactive Statutes
Umali vs. Estanislao
A law may be made operative partly on facts that
occurred prior to the effectivity of such law without being retroactive.
Statute: RA 7167- granting increased personal
exemptions from income tax to be available thenceforth, that is, after said Act
became effective and on or before the deadline for filing income tax returns,
with respect to compensation income earned or received during the calendar year
prior to the date the law took effect.
Castro v. Sagales
A retroactive law (in a legal sense)
one which takes away or impairs vested rights acquired
under existing laws
creates a new obligation and imposes a new duty
attaches a new disability in respect of transactions
or considerations already past
LAWS OPERATE PROSPECTIVELY
Grego v. Comelec
FACTS: A statute despite the generality of its language, must
not be so construed as to overreach acts, events, or matters which transpired
before its passage. Statute: Sec.40 of the LGC disqualifying those removed
from office as a result of an administrative case from running for local
elective positions cannot be applied retroactively.
RULING: It cannot disqualify a person who was
administratively removed from his position prior to the effectivity of said
Code from running for an elective position.
RATIONALE: a law is a rule established to guide
actions with no binding effect until it is enacted.
Buyco v. PNB
RA 1576 which divested the PNB of authority to accept
back pay certificates in payment of loans
Held: does not apply to an offer of payment made
before effectivity of the act.
Lagardo v. Masaganda
RULING: RA 2613, as amended by RA 3090 ON June 1991,
granting inferior courts jurisdiction over guardianship cases, could not be
given retroactive effect in the absence of a saving clause.
Larga v. Ranada Jr.
Held: Sec. 9 & 10 of E.O. 90 amending Sec 4 of
P.D. 1752 could have no retroactive application.
Peo v. Que Po Lay
A person cannot be convicted of violating Circular 20
of the Central Bank, when the alleged violation occurred before publication of
the Circular on the Official Gazette.
Baltazar v. CA
RULING:
It denied retroactive
application to PD 27 decreeing the emancipation of tenants from the bondage of
the soil, & PD 316, prohibiting ejectment of tenants from rice & corn
farmholdings pending promulgation of rules & regulations implementing PD 27
Nilo v CA
RULING: removed ‘personal cultivation’ as the
ground for ejectment of a tenant can’t be given retroactive effect in absence
of statutory statement for retroactivity.
Applied to administrative rulings & circulars:
ABS-CBN Broadcasting v. CTA
RULING: a circular or ruling of the CIR cannot be
given retroactive effect adversely to a taxpayer.
Sanchez v. COMELEC
RULING: the holding of recall proceedings had no
retroactive application
Romualdez v. CSC
RULING: CSC Memorandum Circular No. 29 cannot be
given retrospective effect so as to entitle to permanent appointment an
employee whose temporary appointment had expired before the Circular was
issued.
Applied to judicial decisions for even though not
laws, are evidence of what the laws mean and is the basis of Art.8 of the Civil
Code wherein laws of the Constitution shall form part of the legal system of
the Philippines.
Alvia v. Sandiganbayan
Law: as of the date of the effectivity of this decree,
any case cognizable by the Sandiganbayan is
not an ex post facto law because it is
not a penal statute nor dilutes the right of appeal of the accused.
Director v. Director of
Prisons
When there is already a final judgment & accused
is serving sentence, remedy is to file petition of habeas corpus, alleging that his continued imprisonment is illegal
pursuant to said statute & praying that he be forthwith released.
Statutes substantive in
nature
Substantive law - creates, defines or regulates rights
concerning life, liberty or property, or the powers of agencies or
instrumentalities for administration of public affairs.
Tolentino v. Azalte
In the absence of a contrary intent, statutes which
lays down certain requirements to be complied with before a case can be brought
to court.
Espiritu v. Cipriano
Freezes the amount of monthly rentals for residential
houses during a fixed period
Spouses Tirona v. Alejo
FACTS: Comprehensive Land Reform Law granting
complainants tenancy rights to fishponds and pursuant to which they filed
actions to assert rights which subsequently amended to exempt fishponds from
coverage of statute
RULING: Amendatory law is substantive in nature as
it exempts fishponds from its coverage.
Test for procedural laws: if rule really regulates procedure, the
judicial process for enforcing rights and duties recognized by substantive law
& for justly administering remedy and redress for a disregard or infraction
of them; If it operates as a means of implementing an existing right
Test for substantive laws:
·
Fabian v. Desierto
Where to prosecute an appeal or transferring the venue
of appeal is procedural. Example: Decreeing that appeals from decisions of the
Ombudsman in administrative actions be made to the Court of Appeals Requiring
that appeals from decisions of the NLRC be filed with the Court of Appeals. Generally,
procedural rules are retroactive and are applicable to actions pending and
undermined at the time of the passage of the procedural law, while substantive
laws are prospective.
Effects on pending actions
Iburan v. Labes
Where court originally obtains and exercises
jurisdiction, a later statute restricting such jurisdiction or transferring it
to another tribunal will not affect pending action, unless statute provides
& unless prohibitory words are used.
Lagardo v. Masagana
Where court has no jurisdiction over a certain case
but nevertheless decides it, from which appeal is taken, a statute enacted
during the pendency of the appeal vesting jurisdiction upon such trial court
over the subject matter or such case may not be given retroactive effect so as
to validate the judgment of the court a
quo, in the absence of a saving clause.
Republic v. Prieto
Where a complaint pending in court is defective
because it did not allege sufficient action, it may not be validated by a
subsequent law which affects substantive rights and not merely procedural
matters. Rule against the retroactive operation of statutes in general applies
more strongly with respect to substantive laws that affect pending actions or
proceedings.
Statutes affecting vested rights
A vested right or interest may be said to mean some
right or interest in property that has become fixed or established and is no
longer open to doubt or controversy.
Benguet Consolidated Mining
Co v. Pineda
While a person has no vested right in any rule of law
entitling him to insist that it shall remain unchanged for his benefit, nor has
he a vested right in the continued existence of a statute which precludes its
change or repeal, nor in any omission to legislate on a particular matter, a
subsequent statute cannot be so applied retroactively as to impair his right
that accrued under the old law.
Statutes must be so construed as to sustain its
constitutionality, and prospective operation will be presumed where a retroactive
application will produce invalidity.
Peo v. Patalin
The abolition of the death penalty and its subsequent
re-imposition. Those accused of crimes prior to the re-imposition of the death
penalty have acquired vested rights under the law abolishing it.
Courts have thus given statutes strict constriction to
prevent their retroactive operation in order that the statutes would not impair
or interfere with vested or existing rights. Accused-appellant ‘s rights to be
benefited by the abolition of the death
penalty accrued or attached by virtue of Article 22 of the Revised Penal Code.
This benefit cannot be taken away from them.
Statutes affecting obligations of contract
Any contract entered into must be in accordance with,
and not repugnant to, the applicable law at the time of execution. Such law
forms part of, and is read into, the contract even without the parties
expressly saying so.
U.S. Tobacco Corp. v. Lina
The importation of certain goods without import
license which was legal under the law existing at the time of shipment is not
rendered illegal by the fact that when the goods arrived there was already
another law prohibiting importation without import license. To rule otherwise
in any of these instances is to impair the obligations of contract.
People v. Zeta
Existing law: authorizing a lawyer to charge not more
than 5% of the amount involved as attorney’s fees in the prosecution of certain
veteran’s claim.
Facts: A
lawyer entered into a contract for professional services on contingent basis
and actually rendered service to its successful conclusion. Before the claim
was collected, a statute was enacted.
New statute: Prohibiting the collection of attorney’s
fees for services rendered in prosecuting veteran’s claims.
Issue: whether or not the lawyer can be
prosecuted for violation of the statute for collecting his fees pursuant to the
contract for professional services
RULING: In exonerating the lawyer, the court said:
the statute prohibiting the collection of attorney’s fees cannot be applied
retroactively so as to adversely affect the contract for professional services
and the fees themselves. The 5% fee was contingent and did not become
absolute and unconditional until the veteran’s claim had been collected by the
claimant when the statute was already in force did no alter the situation. For
the “distinction between vested and absolute rights is not helpful and a better
view to handle the problem is to declare those statutes attempting to affect
rights which the courts find to be unalterable, invalid as arbitrary and
unreasonable, thus lacking in due process.” The 5% fee allowed by the
old law is “not unreasonable. Services were rendered thereunder to claimant’s
benefits. The right to fees accrued upon such rendition. Only the payment of
the fee was contingent upon the approval of the claim; therefore, the right was
contingent. For a right to accrue is one thing; enforcement thereof by actual
payment is another. The subsequent law enacted after the rendition of the
services should not as a matter of simple justice affect the agreement, which
was entered into voluntarily by the parties as expressly directed in the
previous law. To apply the new law to the case of defendant-appellant s as to
deprive him of the agreed fee would be arbitrary and unreasonable as
destructive of the inviolability of contracts, and therefore invalid as lacking
in due process; to penalize him for collecting such fees, repugnant to our
sense of justice.”
Repealing and amendatory acts
San Jose v. Rehabilitation
Finance Corp
FACTS: RA 401 which condoned the interest on
pre-war debts from January 1, 1942 to December 31, 1945 amended by RA 671 on
June 16, 1951 by virtually reenacting the old law and providing that “if the
debtor, however, makes voluntary payment of the entire pre-war unpaid principal
obligation on or before December 31, 1952, the interest on such principal
obligation corresponding from January 1, 1946 to day of payment are likewise
condoned”
RULING: a debtor who paid his pre-war obligation
together with the interests on March 14, 1951 or before the amendment was
approved into law, is not entitled to a refund of the interest paid from
January 1, 1946 to March 14, 1951 the date the debtor paid the obligation.
Reason:
“makes voluntary payment” – denotes a present or
future act; thereby not retroactively
“unpaid principal obligation” and “condone” – imply
that amendment does not cover refund of interests paid after its approval.
CIR v. La Tondena
Statute: Imposes tax on certain business activities
is amended by eliminating the clause providing a tax on some of such
activities, and the amended act is further amended, after the lapse of length
of time, by restoring the clause previously eliminated, which requires that the
last amendment should not be given retroactive effect so as to cover the whole
period.
Imperial v. CIR
An amendment which imposes a tax on a certain business
which the statute prior to its amendment does not tax, may not be applied
retroactively so as to require payment of the tax on such business for the
period prior to the amendment
Buyco v. Philippine National
Bank
Issue: WoN Buyco can compel the PNB to accept his
backpay certificate in payment of his indebtedness to the bank
April 24, 1956- RA 897 gave Buyco the right to have
said certificate applied in payment of is obligation thus at that time he
offered to pay with his backpay certificate.
June 16, 1956, RA 1576 was enacted amending the
charter of the PNB and provided that the bank shall have no authority to accept
backpay certificate in payment of indebtedness to the bank.
Held: The Court favored Buyco. All statutes are
construed as having prospective operation, unless the purpose of the
legislature is to give them retroactive effect.
This principle also applies to amendments. RA 1576
does not contain any provision regarding its retroactive effect. It simply states its effectivity upon
approval. The amendment therefore, has
no retroactive effect, and the present case should be governed by the law at
the time the offer in question was made. The rule is familiar that after an act
is amended, the original act continues to be in force with regard to all rights
that had accrued prior to such amendment.
Insular Government v. Frank
Where a contract is entered into by the parties on the
basis of the law then prevailing, the amendment of said law will not affect the
terms of said contract.
The rule applies even if one of the contracting
parties is the government
STATUTES GIVEN RETROACTIVE
EFFECT
Procedural laws
The general law is that the law has no retroactive
effect.
Exceptions: procedural laws; curative laws, which are
given retroactive operation
Procedural laws: adjective laws which prescribe rules and
forms of procedure of enforcing rights or obtaining redress for their invasion.
Applied to criminal law, they provide or regulate the steps by which one who
commits a crime is to be punished.
Remedial statutes or statutes
relating to modes of procedure- which do not create new or take away vested rights, but only operate
in furtherance of the remedy or confirmation of the rights already existing, do
not come within the legal conception of a retroactive law, or the general rule
against the retroactive operation of statutes.
Alday v. Camillon
Provision: BP 129- “nor record or appeal shall be
required to take an appeal.” (procedural in nature and should be applied
retroactively)
Issue: Whether an appeal from an adverse judgment
should be dismissed for failure of appellant to file a record on appeal within
30 days as required under the old rules.
Such question is pending resolution at the time the BP
Blg took effect, became academic upon effectivity of said law because the law
no longer requires the filing a of a record on appeal and its retroactive
application removed the legal obstacle to giving due course to the appeal.
Castro v. Sagales
A statute which transfers the jurisdiction to try
certain cases from a court to a quasi-judicial tribunal is a remedial statute
that is applicable to claims that accrued before its enactment but formulated
and filed after it took effect.
RULING: The court that has jurisdiction over a
claim at the time it accrued cannot validly try to claim where at the time the
claim is formulated and filed, the jurisdiction to try it has been transferred
by law to a quasi-judicial tribunal.
Rationale: for even actions pending in one court may
be validly be taken away and transferred to another and no litigant can acquire
a vested right to be heard by one particular court.
An administrative rule: which is interpretative of a pre-existing statue and
not declarative of certain rights with obligations thereunder is given
retroactive effect as of the date of the effectivity of the statute.
Atlas Consolidated Mining
& Development Corp. v. CA
Issue:
whether a trial court has
been divested of jurisdiction to hear and decide a pending case involving a
mining controversy upon the promulgation of PD 1281 which vests upon the Bureau
of Mines Original and exclusive jurisdiction to hear and decide mining
controversies.
RULING: Yes. PD 1281 is a remedial statute.
It does not create new rights nor take away rights
that are already vested. It only operates in furtherance of a remedy or
confirmation of rights already in existence. It does not come within the
legal purview of a prospective law. As such, it can be given retrospective
application of statutes.
Being procedural in nature, it shall apply to all
actions pending at the time of its enactment except only with respect to those
cases which had already attained h character of a final and executor judgment.
Were it not so, the purpose of the Decree, which is to
facilitate the immediate resolution of mining controversies by granting
jurisdiction to a body or agency more adept to the technical complexities of
mining operations, would be thwarted and rendered meaningless.
Litigants in a mining controversy cannot be permitted
to choose a forum of convenience.
Jurisdiction is imposed by law and not by any of the
parties to such proceedings.
Furthermore, PD 1281 is a special law and under a
well-accepted principle in stat con, the special law will prevail over a
stature or law of general application.
Subido, Jr. v. Sandiganbayan
RULING: Court ruled that RA 7975, in further
amending PD 1606 as regards the Sandiganbayan’s jurisdiction, mode of appeal,
and other procedural matters, is clearly a procedural law, i.e. one which prescribes rules and forms of procedure enforcing
rights or obtaining redress for their invasion, or those which refer to rules
of procedure by which courts applying laws of all kinds can properly administer
justice.
The petitioners suggest that it is likewise curative
or remedial statute, which cures defects and adds to the means of enforcing
existing obligations.
As a procedural and curative statute, RA 7975 may
validly be given retroactive effect, there being no impairment of contractual
or vested rights.
Martinez v. People
Statutes regulating the procedure of the courts will
be construed as applicable to actions pending and undermined at the time of their
passage.
Where at the time the action was filed, the Rules of
Court: “a petition to be allowed to appeal as pauper shall not be entertained
by the appellate court.” The subsequent amendment thereto deleting the sentence
implies that the appellate court is no longer prohibited from entertaining
petitions to appear as pauper litigants, and may grant the petition then
pending action, so long as its requirements are complied with.
Tayag v. CA
Issue: whether an action for recognition filed by
an illegitimate minor after the death of his alleged parent when Art 285 of the
Civil Code was still in effect and has remained pending Art 175 of the Family
Code took effect can still be prosecuted considering that Art 175, which is
claimed to be procedural in nature and retroactive in application, does not
allow filing of the action after the death of the alleged parent.
Held: The rule that a statutory change in
matters of procedure may affect pending actions and proceedings, unless the
language of the act excludes them from its operation, is not so pervasive that
it may be used to validate or invalidate proceedings taken before it goes into
effect, since procedure must be governed by the law regulating it at the time
the question of procedure arises especially where vested rights may be
prejudiced.
Accordingly, Art 175 of the Family Code finds no
proper application to the instant case since it will ineluctably affect
adversely a right of private respondent and, consequentially, of the minor
child she represents, both of which have been vested with the filing of the
complaint in court. The trial court is, therefore, correct in applying the
provisions of Art 285 of the Civil Code and in holding that private respondent’s
cause of action has not yet prescribed.”
Curative statutes
Erectors, Inc. v. NLRC
FACTS: EO 111, amended Art 217 of the Labor Code
to widen the workers, access to the government for redress of grievances by
giving the Regional Directors & the Labor Arbiters concurrent jurisdiction
over cases involving money claims.
Remedy: RA 6715further amended Art 217 by delineating
their respective jurisdictions. Under RA 6715, the RD has exclusive jurisdiction
over cases involving claims, provided: The claim is presented by an employer or
person employed in domestic or household services or household help under the
Code. The claimant no longer being employed does not seek reinstatement.The
aggregate money claim of the employee or househelper doesn’t exceed P5,000.
Issue: Amendment created a situation where the
jurisdiction of the RDs and LAs overlapped.
Held: EO 111 & RA 6715 are therefore
curative statutes.
A curative statute is enacted to cure defects in a
prior law or to validate legal proceedings, instruments or acts of public
authorities which would otherwise be void for want of conformity with certain
existing legal requirements
Adong v. Cheong Seng Gee
Statutes intended to validate what otherwise void or
invalid marriages, being curative, will be given retroactive effect.
Santos v. Duata
Statute which provides that a contract shall presumed
an equitable mortgage in any of the cases therein enumerated, and designed
primarily to curtail evils brought about by contracts of sale with right of
repurchase, is remedial in nature & will be applied retroactively to cases
arising prior to the effectivity of the statute.
Abad v. Phil American General
Inc.
Where at the time action is filed in court the latter
has no jurisdiction over the subject matter but a subsequent statute clothes it
with jurisdiction before the matter is decided.
The statute is in the nature of a curative law with
retroactive operation to pending proceedings and cures the defect of lack of
jurisdiction of the court at the commencement of the action.
Legarda v. Masaganda
Where a curative statute is enacted after the court
has rendered judgment, which judgment is naturally void as the court has at the
time no jurisdiction over the subject of the action, the enactment of the
statute conferring jurisdiction to the court does not validate the void
judgment for the legislature has no power to make a judgment rendered without
jurisdiction of a valid judgment.
Frivaldo v. COMELEC
(an example considered curative & remedial as well as one which creates new rights &
new remedies, generally held to e retroactive in nature- PD 725, which
liberalizes the procedure of repatriation)
Held: PD 725 & the re-acquisition of the Filipino
citizenship by administrative repatriation pursuant to said decree is
retroactive.
De Castro v. Tan
What has been given retroactive effect in Frivaldo is not only the law itself but
also Phil. Citizenship re-acquired pursuant to said law to the date of
application for repatriation, which meant that his lack of Filipino citizenship
at the time he registered as a voter, one of the qualification is as a
governor, or at the time he filed his certificate of candidacy for
governorship, one of the qualification is as a governor, was cured by the
retroactive application of his repatriation.
Republic v. Atencio
Curative statute: one which confirms, refines and
validate the sale or transfer of a public land awarded to a grantee, which a
prior law prohibits its sale within a certain period & otherwise invalid
transaction under the old law.
Municipality of San Narciso,
Quezon v. Mendez
Sec. 442(d) of the Local Government Code of 1991,
provides that municipal districts organized pursuant to presidential issuances
or executive orders & which have their respective sets of elective
municipal officials holding at the time of the effectivity of the code shall
henceforth be considered as a regular municipalities.
This is a curative statute as it validates the
creation of municipalities by EO which had been held to be an invalid
usurpation of legislative power.
Tatad v. Garcia Jr.
Issue: Where there is doubt as to whether
government agency under the then existing law, has the authority to enter intoa
negotiated contract for the construction of a government project under the
build-lease-and transfer scheme
Held: The subsequent enactment of a statute
which recognizes direct negotiation of contracts under such arrangement is a
curative statute.
As all doubts and procedural lapses that might have
attended the negotiated contract have been cured by the subsequent statute
Statutes relating to prescription
Nagrampa v. Nagrampa
FACTS: Art. 1116 of the Civil Code: “prescription
already running before the effectivity of this Code shall be governed by laws
previously in force; but if since the time this Code took effect the entire
period herein required for prescription should elapse, the present Code shall
be applicable even though by the former laws a longer period might be
required.”
RULING: The provision is retroactive since it
applied to a cause that accrued prior to its effectivity which when filed has
prescribed under the new Civil Code even though the period of prescription
prescribed under the old law has not ended at the time the action is filed in
court
The fact that the legislature has indicated that the
statute relating to prescription should be given retroactive effect will not
warrant giving it if it will impair vested rights
Statute of limitations prescribing a longer period to
file an action than that specified under the law may not be construed as having
retroactive application if it will revive the cause that already prescribed
under the old statute for it will impair vested rights against whom the cause
is asserted.
Statute which shorten the period of prescription &
requires that causes which accrued prior to its effectivity be prosecuted or
filed not later than a specific date may not be construed to apply to existing
causes which pursuant to the old law under which they accrued, will not
prescribe until a much longer period than that specified in the later enactment
because the right to bring an action is founded on law which has become vested
before the passage of the new statute of limitations
Apparently conflicting decisions on prescription
Billones v. CIR
Issue: whether Sec. 7A of Common wealth Act 144,
amended by RA 1993, to the effect that “any action to enforce an cause (i.e. non payment of wages or overtime
compensation) under this Act shall be commenced within 3 years after such
cause of action accrued, otherwise it shall be forever barred. Provided, however, that actions already
commenced before the effective day of this Act shall not be affected by the
period herein prescribed.
As statute shortened the period of prescription from 6
to 3 yrs. from the date the cause of action accrued, it was contended that to
give retroactive effect would impair vested rights since it would operate to
preclude the prosecution of claims that accrued more than 3 but less than 6
yrs.
RULING: A statute of limitations is procedural in
nature and no vested right can attach thereto or arise therefrom. When
the legislature provided that “actions already commenced before the effectivity
of this Act shall not be affected by the period herein prescribed,” it intended
to apply the statute to all existing actions filed after the effectivity of the
law. Because the statute shortened the period within which to bring an
action & in order to violate the constitutional mandate, claimants are
injuriously affected should have a reasonable period of 1 yr. from time new
statute took effect within which to sue on such claims.
Corales v. Employee’s
Compensation Commission
Same issue on Billones but Court arrived at a
different conclusion.
Issue: Whether a claim for workmen’s compensation
which accrued under the old Workmen’s Compensation Act (WCA) but filed under
after March 31, 1975 is barred by the provision of the New Labor Code which
repealed the WCA.
WCA requires that “workmen’s compensation claims
accruing prior to the effectivity of this Code shall be filed with the
appropriate regional offices of the Department of Labor not later than March
31, 1975, otherwise shall be barred forever.”
RULING: Provision doesn’t apply to workmen’s
compensation that accrued before Labor Code took effect, even if claims were
not filed not later than March 31, 1975.
Rationale: prescriptive period for claims which
accrued under WCA as amended 10 yrs. which is “a right found on statute” &
hence a vested right, that cannot be impaired by the retroactive application of
the Labor Code.
Statutes relating to appeals: A statute relating to appeals is remedial or
procedural in nature and applies to pending actions in which no judgment has
yet been promulgated at the time the statute took effect.
Berliner v. Roberts
Where a statute shortened the period for taking
appeals form thirty days to fifteen days from notice of judgment, an appeal
taken within thirty days but beyond fifteen days from notice of judgment
promulgated before the statute took effect is deemed seasonably perfected.
