Practice question
A legislature expressly states that a new civil liability applies to completed past transactions. A litigant says that the clause alone ends the inquiry even if application would unconstitutionally impair an established protected right. Which answer is correct?
- Express wording proves constitutional validity in every case
- No retrospective civil provision can ever be valid
- Only the statute's title matters
- The clause establishes intended temporal reach, but the court must still examine applicable constitutional limitations and the claimed protected right
- The litigant may ignore all judicial proceedings
Legal references
- Civil Code Articles3–5,7,1334 and1409–1410: https://lawphil.net/statutes/repacts/ra1949/ra_386_1949.html
- People v. Lastimosa, GR265758, February3 2025, main decision: https://lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2025/feb2025/gr_265758_2025.html
- Nedira v. NJ World, GR240005, December6 2022, main decision: https://lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2022/dec2022/gr_240005_2022.html
- 1987 Constitution, ArticleIII Sections1 and10: https://lawphil.net/consti/cons1987.html
Answer this question in flashcards to review your response and continue practicing.