Chapter 9

The law looks to the future only and

Jeremias A. Carolino, petitioner's husband, retired from AFP with the rank of colonel under No, PD 1638 should not have been applied and cannot be has no retroactive effect unless the
General Order No. 1208 pursuant to Sec 1(A) and 10 of RA 340. He started receiving his monthly used against the petitioner as her husband's retirement legislator may have formally given that
Adorcion Carolino (Spouse and in Substitution retirement pay of 18,315 in Dec 1976 until it was witheld by respondents in March 2005. Jeremias and pension were granted to him by AFP under RA 340 effect to some legal provisions; that all
of the Deceased Jeremias A. Carolino) vs Gen. wrote a letter to SFP Chief of Staff asking for the reasons of the withholding of his retirement pay. W/N PD 1638 be given a which was not superseded by PD 1638, a later statute. stautes are to be construed as having
Generoso Senga, as Chief of Staff of the Armed Myrna Villaruz informed him that his loss of fil citizenship caused the deletion of his name in the list retrospective application and be Retirement benefits due petitioner's husaband under RA only prospective operation, unless the
Forces of the Philippines; et. Al. of AFP Pensioners' Payroll (PD 1638) effective March 5, 2005.That he could be re-entitled to his considered as impliedly 340 is an acquired right which cannot be taken by a purpose and intention of the legislature
GR No 189649, April 20, 2015 retirement benefits by complying with RA 9225 (Dual Citizenship Act). Under Sec 4,5,6 of RA 340 repealing RA 340 subsequent law. PD 1638 does not contain any provision to give them a retrospective effect is
retired military personnel are disqualified from receivig pension benefits if they swore allegiance to regarding its retroactive application. Petition Granted, expressly declared or is necessarily
another country. Jeremias filed a petiton seeking reinstatement of his name in the list of the AFP Decision of CA reversed and set aside. implied from the language used; and
retired officers and resumption of payment of his retirement benefits. RTC - granted the petition. CA - that every case of doubt must be
granted respondents appeal (that PD 1638 repealed RA 340) resolved against retrospective effect.

Fernando Gallardo filed a complaint to terminate the leasehold of Juan Borromeo (a tenant) so No, the applicble law when Gallardo filed the complaint
that he may cultivate it himself as he had retired from his government job as a letter carrier. was Sec 36(1) of RA 3844. RA 6389 cannot be given a As a rule, laws cannot be given a
Fernando Gallardo vs Juan Borromeo Borromeo alleged that Gallardo has no knowledge of farming and that his only purpose is to eject W/N the CA correctly gave retroactive effect in the absence of a statutory provision for retroactive effect in the absence of a
GR No L-36007, May 25, 1988 him. TC - dismissed the petition and ordered Gallardo to maintain the peaceful possesion of retroactive application to Sec 7 retroactivity or a clear implication of the law to that effect. statutory provision for retroactivity or a
161 SCRA 500 Borromeo of the landholding. CA - affirmed the decision of the Court of Agrarian Reform applying Sec of RA 6389 Hence, Gallardo may terminate the tenancy of Borromeo clear implication of the law to that
7, RA 6389 (that the landowner's desire to cultivate the land himself is not a valid ground for and till his own land. Decision of the Agrarian Court and the effect.
dispossessing the tenant. Court of Appeals set aside.

Pio Balatbat is the agricultural lessee of a parcel of land in Sta Ana Pampanga which is owned by
Daniel Garcia. Garcia sold the land to Domingo Pasion and had it declared for taxation purposes.
Pasion, on a claim he will personally cultivate the land filed with the Court of Agrarian Relations a All statutes are to be construed as
complaint to eject Balatbat alleging that he had notified him of his intention to personally cultivate No, under Art 4 of the NCC, in order that a law may have having only a prospective operation
Pio Balatbat vs Court of Appeals and Domingo the land under Sec 36(1) of RA 3844, but after a lapse of 1 year from the notice of receipt, Balatbat W/N Sec 7 of RA 6389 should retroactive effect it is necessary that an express provision unless the purpose and the intention of
Pasion refused to vacate the land. TC - decision against Balatbat. CA - affrimed the decision of the agrarian be given retroactive effect. to this effect be made in the law, otherwise nothing should the legislature to give them a
GR No 36378, January 27, 1992 court. During the pendency of the appeal, Congress passed RA 6389, Sec 7 w/c amended Sec 36(1) of be understood which is not embodied in the law. Petition retrospective effect is expressly
205 SCRA 419 RA 3844 (personal cultivation no longer a ground to disposses an agricultural lessee. Hence, Pasion Dismissed. declared or is necessarily implied from
can no longer dispossess Balatbat on that ground because it has been removed from the statute the language used.
books.

Electors Inc. recruited Burgos to work as service contract driver in Saudi for 12 months w/ a salary
and allowance of $165/month and a bonus of $1000 if after 12 months he renews his employment
contract w/o availing of his vacation/home leave. The contract was approved by the Ministry of
Labor and Employment w/c was not implemented. In Dec 1979, Erectors notified Burgos that the
position was no longer available. They executed another contract for the position of helper/laborer
w/ a salary and allowance of $105/month, the contract was not submitted to the MLE for approval. No, at the time of the filing of the, the LA had clear Laws should only be applied
Erectors, Inc. vs National Labor Relations On Dec 18, 1979 Burgos left the country and worked for petitioner at Saudi. He received a monthly W/N EO 797 creating the jurisdiction over the same. The time Burgos filed his prospectively unless the legislative
Commission, Hon. Julio Andres, Jr. and Florencio salary and allowance of $210. He renewed his contract of employmentm w/ an increase in salary Philippine Overseas complaint the prevailing law was PD 1691 w/c vested to the intent to give them retroactive effect is
Burgos ($231). Burgos returned to Phil, and envoked his 1st employment contract demanding from Erectors Employment Administration be LA the exclusive jurisdiction over cases involving employer- expressly declared or is necessarily
GR No 104215, May 8, 1996 the difference between his salary and allowance as indicated, and the amount actually paid to him given retroactive effect. employee relationship. The rule on prospectivity of laws implied from the language used.
256 SCRA 629 plus contractual bous. Erectors denied his claim. Burgos filed with the LA a complaint for should apply to EO 797. it should not affect jurisdiction
underpayment of wages and nonpayment of overtime pay & contractual bonus. While the case was over cases filed prior to its effectivity. Petition Dismissed.
in conciliation EO 797 was created w/c vested the POEA w/ the jurisdiction over cases invloving
filipino workers for overseas employment. LA - decisionin favor of Burgos. NLRC - dismissed the
appeal on the question of jursidiction of LA, affirmed LA's decision. Erectors argues that EO 797
applies retroactively to effect pending cases including the complaint filed by Burgos.
 Rovira Alcantara filed a civil case for the recovery of possesion of a land in Cainta, Rizal.
(formerly owned by Rovira's father) Victor Alcantara and Alfredo Ignacio mortgaged the property to
Philippine Bank and Trust Company. After two years, the property was parceled out by Alcantara and
Ignacio through their firm and separately sold to different buyers. One of which is Ambrosio Rotairo Yes, as settled in the case of Eugenio vs Exec Sec Drilon
who bought 200 sq/m on installment basis. Rotairo constructed a house in the proeprty and after the specific terms of PD 957 provide for its retroactive
completing the payments, a deed od absolute sale was executed. Alcantara and Ignacio defaulted in effect even to contracts and transactions entered prior to
Ambrosio Rotairo vs Rovira Alcantara and their loan obligations causing Phil Bank to foreclose the mortgage on the entire property. The title W/N PD 957 should be given its enactment. The contract to sell between Rotairo and The specific terms of a law may
Victor Alcantara was consolidated in the name of Pilipinas Bank, who sold the property to Rovira, Alcantara's retrospective application. Ignacio & Co was entered into 1970 and the agreement was provide for its retroactive effect even
GR No. 173632, September 29, 2014 daughter. Rovira filed a case for recovery of possession and Damages. RTC - dismissed the case, that fully consummated w/ Rotairo's completion of payments to contracts and transactions entered
the transaction between Ignacio & Co and Rotairo was covered by PD 957. CA - reversed, turn over and the execution of the Deed of Sale is his favor in 1979 into prior to its encatment.
the possession of the property to Rovira, stating that PD 957 is not applicable since the mortgage hence PD 957 is applicable.Petition is granted, CA
was constituted prior to the sale to Rotairo. Rotairo insist on the applicability of PD 957 & the resolution set aside.
transaction between Rotairo and Ignacio should fall w/n the protection of the law. Rovira relies on
the prior registration of the mortgage and the sale in her fvor against the petitioner's unregistered
transactions.

On May 28, 2001, Rene Relampagos (Bohol provincial governor) permanently appointed Liza Quirog No, the CSC Resolution was issued 3 days after she took her All statutes are to be construed as
as Provincial Government Department Head of the Office of the Bohol Provincial Agriculture w/c was oath (June 1, 2001) Evidentlly Quirog's appointment should having only a prospective operation
Liza M. Quirog and Rene L. Relampagos vs confirmed by Sangguniang Panlalawigan, Quirog then took her oath. Before the issuance of the W/N Quirog's appointment not have been subjected to the requirements under said unless the purpose and the intention of
Governor Erico B. Aumentado permanent appointment the PSB of HRM and Dev Office of Bohol issued a cert that Quirog was one violated Item no. 3 of CSC resolution as its application is against the prospective the legislature to give them a
GR No. 163443, Novemebr 11, 2008 of two candidates qualified for said position. The Director of Civil Service Commission regional Office Resolution No. 010988 dated application of las. Quirog's appointment did not violate the retrospective effect is expressly
570 SCRA 582 invalidated Quirog's appointment upon finding that the same wa spart of the bulk appointments June 4, 2001 CSC Resolution, the said Resolution having taken effect declared or is necessarily implied from
issued by Relampagos w/c is in of Item No. 3(d) of CSC. (prohibition against the issuance of midnight after the appointment was extended. the language used.
appointments was already laid down as early as Feb 29, 2000.

The court sustained the imposed penalty fine of 10 Mil to

be paid by each of the accused but amend the penalty to
On Oct 13, 2001, in Brgy Kiloloran, Quezon, Morilla, Mayor Mitra, Willie Yang and Ruel Dequilla reclusion perpetua under RA 7659 and the principle of
People of the Philippines vs Javier Morilla Y (all belonging to a syndicate crime group) helped one another in the transport of illegal drugs (503.8 retroactive applictaion of lighter penalty. Petition denied, Criminal statutes with a favorable
Avellano kg of shabu) by the use of a starex van w/ a commemorative plate "mayor" and a municipal W/N the penalty of life CA affimed with modifications. effect to the accused have, as to him,
GR No 189833, February 05, 2014 ambulance. RTC - convicted Morilla and Mayor Mitra of illegal transport of shabu, penalty of life imprisonement is proper. a retroactive effect.
imprisonment. It absolved Dequilla and Yang due to insufficient evidence to convict them. CA - Sec 15, RA 6425 - imprisonment, 6yrs-12 yrs, 12,000
affirmed RTC, conspiracy between MItra and Morilla. PD 1683 - life imprisonment to death, 20-30,000
RA 7659 - reclusion perpetua to death, 500,000/1 Mil

People of the Philippines, Plaintiff-Appellee, vs

Proculo Mejeca y Montallana, Baldomero Lita Beriana (vault custodian of JTC Pawnshop owned by Victoria Tuparan) was fatally shot when No, RA 8294 considers the use of unlicensed firearm in Insofar as RA 8294 is not beneficial to
Quintina, Romeo Solarte, Diosecoro Narciso, she tried to flee to safety when armed men barged in the shop and took jewelries (3 Mil). Charged W/N RA 8294 which took effect the killing of a victim as an AC, cant be givem retroactive the accused because it unduly
Adlina Narciso, Nicolas Picache, Jr., Julie Hilario, forRobbery in Band w/ Homicide were the follwing; Montallana, Quintana, Solarte, Diosecoro on July 6, 1997, can be applied effect because it would be unfavorable to the accused. RA aggravatates the crime, such new law
Arnold Narciso and Dante Aras, accused. Arnold Narciso, Arnold Narciso and Dante Aras. TC - Arnold Narciso guilty beyond reasonable doubt for the against the accused-petitioner. 8294 is not beneficial to the accused because it aggravates will not be given retroactive
Narciso, accused-appellant. crime of Robbery w/ Homicide Art 294(1) of RPC w/ AC of use of unlicensed firearm and in band the crime. application, lest it acquire the character
GR No 146425, Novemebr 21, 2002 suffer penalty of death by lethal injection. of an ex post facto law.
392 SCRA 420

Yes, nowhere does the record show that

accused-petitioner's demurrer to evidence was filed with
Aniceto Ocampo was charged for violation of PD 772 (Anti Squatting Law) Upon arraignement he prior leave of court, the retroactive effect of the
Aniceto C. Ocampo vs Court of Appeals pleaded not guilty. He waived the presentation of his evidence and instead filed a motion to dismiss W/N the Motion to Dismiss amendment would therefore work against the petitioner.
GR No 79060, December 8, 1989 on the ground that prosecution did not present Transfer Cert of Title to prove ownership of the land, filed by accused-petitioner is a By moving to dismiss on the ground of insufficiency of Procedural Laws are retrospective.
180 SCRA 27 and thatit failed to prove that the land where Ocampo built his house belongs to UP. TC - denied bar for him to present evidence. evidence, he waived his right to present evidence to
motion to dismiss, guilty beyond reasonable doubt. CA - affirmed the TC substantiate his defense and in effect submits the case for
judgement on the basis of the evidence for prodecution.
 On Dec 24, 1982, Roy Camaso (5 yrs old) while standing on the sidewalk of M. dela Fuente,
Sampaloc Manila was sideswiped by a motorcycle driven owned by Yakult Philippines and driven by Even if the action was instituted before the promulgation
their employee, Larry Salvado. He was charged with reckless imprudence resulting to slight physical W/N a civil action instituted of 1985 RCP, provision may apply retrospectively. The
Yakult Philippines and Larry Salvado vs Court of injuries. A complaint for damages was filed by David Camaso (Roy's fther) against Yakult and Salvado. after the criminal action wa offended party has not waived the civil action nor
Appeals RTC - Yakult and Salvado were ordere dto pay jointly for the expenses incurred. Yakult and Salavdo sfiled would prosper even if reserved the right to institute it separately nor have they Procedural Laws have retroactive
GR No 91856, October 5, 1990 claims that civil action for damages for injuries arising from negligence of Salvado w/o malice cant be there was no reservation to file insitutted a civil action prior to the crim action. The civil application
190 SCRA 357 filed independently under Art 33 of CC. and that under Sec 1, Rule 3 of the 1985 Rules on Crim a separate civil action. action in this case was filed before presentation of
Procedure, separate civil actiob may not be filed unless reservation is expressly made. CA - dismissed evidence for the prosecution. Hence, the actual filing of the
the petition. civil action is even far better than the compliance with the
requirememt of an express reservation. Petition Dneied.
On Aug 23, 1994, Teofilo Martinez filed before CA a motion to litigate as pauper attached w/
supporting affidavits executed by himself and by 2 seemingly disinterested person attesting to hi A motion to litigate as an indigent can be made even
selligibility to avail of such privilege. CA - denied the motion and directed Martinez to remit the before the appellate courts, either for the prosecution of
Teofilo Martinez vs People of the Philippines docketing fees (420) w/n 5 days from notice. Martinez filed a motion for reconsideration w/c was W/N a motion to litigate as appeals, in petitions for review or in special civil actions. Opinions and rulings of officials of the
GR No 132852, May 31, 2000 denied. He then filed a manifestation, transmitting the docket fee required under protest, this was pauper can be entertained by Sec 16, rule 41 of the 1964 Revised Rules of Courts was government called upon to execute or
332 SCRA 694 evidenced by 2 postal money orders attached to the motion to litigate as pauper. CA - dismissed the appellate court. carried over in the 1997 Rules of Civil Procedure. implement administartive laws
petition, citing MArtinez's failure to pay the docket fee. CA - denied his latest motion stating that the Resolution set aside, petitioner allowed to litigate as command much respect and weight.
amount remitted was short of 150. pauper.

TRIAL COURT - 1. The contract between the parties is not an absolute sale but an equitable
mortgage. 2. Tan should pay to the respondents Magdangal w/n 120 days after the finality of the
decision 59,200 plus interest. CA - affirmed the decision of the trial court, both parties receive the
decision on Oct 5, 1995. The clerk of court entered in the book of entries of judgement the decision
w/c stated that the decision has become final and executory on Oct 21, 1995. The CA erred in applying the 1997 Revised Rules of
Jaime Tan, Jr., as Judicial Administrator of the Procedure. Sec 1, Rule 39 of 1997 RRP should not be given
Intestate Estate of Jaime C. Tan, Petitioner vs Magdangal filed a motion for consolidation and writ of possession, alleging that the 120 day period W/N Sec 1, Rule 39 of the retroactive effect as it would result in great injustice to the Section 1, Rule 39 of the 1997 Revised
Hon Court of Appeals and Jose A. Magdangal of redemption of Tan has expired, that the period began 15 days after Oct 5, 1995 (date when the Revised Rules of Civil Procedure petitioner. The petitioner has the substantive right to Rules of Procedure should not be given
and Estrella Magdangal, respondents finality of the judgement of the TC as affirmed by CA commenced to run). Tan filed a motion for should be given retroactive redeem the subjet lot, he can't be penalized with the loss retroactive effect in this case as it
GR No 136368, January 16, 2002 execution, Tan deposited with the clerk of court on April 17, 1996 the repurchase price of the lot plus effect. of the subject lot when he faitfully followed the laws and would result in great injustie to the
373 SCRA 524 interest as ordered by the decision. TC - allowed Tan to redeem the lot, It ruled that 120 day period the rule on the period of redemption. Judgement and petitioner.
shalll be from the date of entry judgement (Mar 13, 1996) CA - set aside the ruling of TC applying resolution set aside.
1997 Revised Rules of Civil Procedure.

The rule that governs the finality of the judgement is Rule 51 of the Revised Rules of Court. However
the 1997 Revised Rules of Civil Procedure amended the rule on finality of judgement

Yes, It is undeniable that there was substantial compliance

with PD 1508 w/c does not require strict technical
Wilson Diu and Dorcita Diu filed a complaint for sum of money against private respondents. compliace with its procedural requirement. Although no
Wilson Diu and Dorcita Diu vs Court of Appeals When the matter was brought before the Barangay Chairman of Naval the parties failed to reach W/N the confrontation before pangkat was formed, the court believes that there was Procedural provisions of the Local
GR No 115213, December 19, 1995 amicable settlement. The barangay chairman issued a certification to file action. CA - the case was the Barangay Chairman of Naval substantial compliance with law. Under Sec 142 of the Government Code are retrospective.
251 SCRA 472 dismissed, non compliance with PD 1508, since after the brgy capt's effor to settle the dispute failed, satisfied the requirement Local Gvt Code the confrontation before the Lupon
the Pangkat Tagapagkasundo was not constituted for settling the matter. therefore in PD 1508. Chairman or tha pangkat is sufficient compliace with the
precondition for filing case in court. Petition Granted, CA
decisionset aside and judgement of RTC reinstated.

Aug 20, 1959, Pres Garcia issued EO 353 creating the municipal district of San Andres, Quezon by
segregating from the municipality of San Narciso the barrios of San Andres, Mangero, Alibijaban,
Pansoy, Camflora, and Tala. Oct 5, 1965, Pres Macapagal issued EO 174, San Andres was officialy A quo warranto proceeding assailing the lawful authority of
recognized as a first class municipality starting July 1, 1963 under Sec 2, RA 1515. a political subdivision should be timely raised. San Narciso
Municipality of San Narciso, Quezon vs Hon. San Narciso filed a petition for quo waranto against the officials of San Andres, praying for the challenged EO 353, 30 years after the creation of EO 353. Curative statutes are validly accepted
Antonio V. Mendez, Sr. nullification o f EO 353, and that local officials San Andres be permanently ordered to refrain from San Andres has been considered to be one of the 12 in this jurisdiction subject to the usual
GR No 103702, December 6, 1994 perforrming their duties. They claim that EO 353, was a clear usurpation of inherent powers of the municiplaities of Quezon under an ordinance. The power to qualification against impairment of
239 SCRA 11 legislature and violative of separation of powers. San Andres filed a motion to dismiss stating that create political subdivisions is a function of the legislature. vested rights.
the case had become moot and academic with the encatment of RA 7160 (stating that municipalities Petition Dismissed.
shall continu to exist) TC - dismissed the petition for lack of cause of action that RA 7160 cured the
defects on the PD's and EO's, denying motion for reconsideration.
 Trade Union of the Philippines and Allied Services (TUPAS) filed a complaint for alleged
unpaid wages and wage supplement against Briad-Agro Development. Briad-Agro Dev failed to
submit controverting evidence despite due notice of Director Balbin who ruled in favor of the EO 111 a curative law (hence it has retroactive effect) made
Briad Agro-Development Corporation vs Hon. employees and ordered them to pay 5,369,909. Briad-Agro Dev claims that the regional director has Zambales Base Metals vs Minister of Labor no longer a
Dionisio Dela Cerna no authority to entertain pecuniary claim of workers such as in the case of Zambales Base Metals vs good law. The amendment was meant to make both the Curative statutes have retrospective
GR No 83225, June 29, 1989 Minister of Labor. NLRC - dimsissed the appeal on the stregth of EO 111 (jurisdiction on monetary Sec of Labor (Regional Directors) and the LA share effect.
174 SCRA 524 claims was granted to regional directors) Briad-Agro Dev reiterates that jurisdiiction over money jurisdiction. Petition Dismissed.
claims is exclusive to the LA of NLRC (Art 217 of Labor Code). The Solicitor General relies on EO 111
w/c amended Art 128(b) of Labor Code,

March 30, 1989, Ballagan was convicted of violating Sec 4, Art 2 of RA 6425 (Dangerous Drug Act
of 1972). RA 6425 was amended by RA 7659. In People vs Simon, the court explicitly states that No, In the event that RA 7659 is applies retrospectively to
beneficient provisions of the law shall be given retrospective effect especially the provision on Ballagan, he has to suffer not only reclusion perpetua but
penalties imposed upon the quantity of the drugs involved. The marijuana transported in this case is also accessory penalties and the fine imposed on hm has a
People of the Philippines vs Donald Ballagan more that 750 grams, the imposable penalty would be reclusion perpetua to death and fine of minimum of 20,000, under the new law he would have to The beneficient provisions of RA 7659
GR No. 88278, August 23, 1995 500,000 to 10 Mil. Sec 27 of RPC was also amended by RA 7659 where reclusion perpetua is now 20 W/N RA 7659 be given a pay 500,000 minimum. Hence the retrospective application shall begiven retrospective effect.
247 SCRA 535 years to 40 years, where before any person sentence with the penalty shall be pardoned after retroactive effect. RA 7659, where the penalty of life imprisonment has been
undergoing the penalty of 30 years. On the other hand the penalty of life imprisonement was imposed by the TC would be more burdensome to
correctly imposed on Ballagan, becuase no AC or MC were proven. Life imprisonment & reclusion Ballagan. Judgement Affirmed.
perpetua are different penalties. Reclusion Perpetua carries accesory penalties and after 30 years he
can be elligible to pardon, life imprisonment does not have any definite extent or duration.