Prospective Statutes

•PROSPECTIVE STATUTES•Operates upon facts or transactions that occur after the statute takes effect, one that looks and applies to the future.1. Penal statutes, generally2. Ex post facto law 3. Bill of attainder4. Statutes substantive in nature5. Statutes affecting vested rights6. Statutes affecting obligations of contracts7. Repealing an amendatory acts

Repealing and Amendatory Acts

• Statutes which repeal earlier or prior laws operate prospectively, unless the legislative intent to give them retroactive effect clearly appears.

• Although a repealing state is intended to be retroactive, it will not be so construed if it will impair vested rights or the obligations of contracts, or unsettle matters that had been legally done under the old law.

• Repealing statutes which are penal in nature are generally applied retroactively if favorable to the accused, unless the contrary appears or the accused is otherwise not entitled to the benefits of the repealing act.

Repealing and Amendatory Acts

• While an amendment is generally construed as becoming a part of the original act as if it had always been contained therein , it may not be given a retroactive effect unless it is so provided expressly or by necessary implication and no vested right or obligations of contract are thereby impaired.

• The general rule on the prospective operation of statutes also applies to amendatory acts

Amendments

AMENDMENT Change or modification by addition or deletion, or alteration of a statute which survives in its amended form.

Revision

REVISIONPurpose is to restate existing laws into one statutes, simplify complicated provisions, and make the laws on the subject easily found.

Repeal

REPEALA statute repealed is rendered revoked completely

Case-San Jose v. Rehabilitation Finance Corp

• 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”

• Held: 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

Case: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

Case: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

Case:Buyco v. Philippine National Bank

• Issue: can Buyco 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.

Case:Buyco v. Philippine National 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.

Case: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

RETROACTIVE STATUTESCreates a new obligation, imposes a new duty or attaches a new disability in respect to a transaction already past.

1.Procedural laws2.Curative statutes3.Police power legislations4.Statutes relating to prescription5.Statutes relating to appeals

General Rule and Exceptions on Retroactive 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

– they refer to rules of procedure by which courts applying laws of all kinds can properly administer injustice

– they include rules of pleadings, practice and evidence– Applied to criminal law, they provide or regulate the

steps by which one who commits a crime is to be punished.

Procedural Laws

– 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.

– A new statute which deals with procedure only is presumptively applicable to all actions – those which have accrued or are pending.

– Statutes regulating the procedure of the courts will be construed as applicable to actions pending and undetermined at the time of their passage.

Procedural Laws

• The retroactive application of procedural laws is not:– violative of any right of a person who may feel that he is

adversely affected;– nor constitutionally objectionable.

• Rationale: no vested right may attach to, nor arise from, procedural laws.

• A person has no vested right in any particular remedy, and a litigant cannot insist on the application to the trial of his case, whether civil or criminal, of any other than the existing rules of procedure

Case: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.

•

Case: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.

• Held: 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.

Case: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.

• Held: 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.

Case:Atlas Consolidated Mining & Development Corp. v. CA

• 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.

Case:Subido, Jr. v. Sandiganbayan• 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.

Case: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.

Exceptions to the rule on Procedural Laws

• The rule does not apply where:– the statute itself expressly or by necessary implication

provides that pending actions are excepted from it operation, or where to apply it to pending proceedings would impair vested rights

– Courts may deny the retroactive application of procedural laws in the event that to do so would not be feasible or would work injustice.

• Nor may procedural laws be applied retroactively to pending actions if to do so would involve intricate problems of due process or impair

Case: Tayag vs. 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 maybe prejudiced.

Case: Tayag v. CA

• 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.”