REPUBLIC OF THE PHILIPPINES V.

COURT OF APPEALS
G.R. no. 79732
November 8, 1993

Petitioner: Republic of the Philippines

Respondent: Court of Appeals, Henrico Uvero et al.
Ponente: Vitug, J.

Facts:
 This case is about a petition for review filed by the Republic of the Philippines in the decision
of the lower court to favor the respondents their demand to base the just compensation for
the widening and concreting of Nabua-Bato-Agos Section, Philippine Japan Highway Loan
Road on the fair market value and not set by Presidential Decree no. 76. The PD fixes
payment in the basis of the assessment by the assessor or declared valuation by the owner,
whichever is lower.
 A similar case from reviewed by the SC, in another judicial decision, declared that PD 76
including PD 1533 as unconstitutional.

Issue:

Whether or not the declaration of nullity of the law in question should have prospective, not
retroactive, application.

Ruling:

Yes. The strict view considers a legislative enactment which is declared unconstitutional
as being, for all legal intents and purposes, a total nullity, and it is deemed as if had never
existed. Here, of course, we refer to the law itself being per se repugnant to the Constitution. It
is not always the case, however, that a law is constitutionally faulty per se. Thus, it may well be
valid in its general import. but invalid in its application to certain factual situations. To exemplify,
an otherwise valid law may be held unconstitutional only insofar as it is allowed to operate
retrospectively such as, in pertinent cases, when it vitiates contractually vested rights. To that
extent, its retroactive application may be so declared invalid as impairing the obligations of
contracts.

A judicial declaration of invalidity, it is also true, may not necessarily obliterate all the
effects and consequences of a void act occurring prior to such a declaration. Thus, in our
decisions on the moratorium laws, we have been constrained to recognize the interim effects of
said laws prior to their declaration of unconstitutionality, but there we have likewise been unable
to simply ignore strong considerations of equity and fair play. So also, even as a practical
matter, a situation that may aptly be described as fait accompli may no longer be open for
further inquiry, let alone to be unsettled by a subsequent declaration of nullity of a governing
statute.

Doctrine of Operative Fact - as an exception to the general rule (an unconstitutional law is void),
only applies as a matter of equity and fair play.