Mindanao State University College

of Law – General Santos City

extension campus

Remedial Law reviewer

4A Remedial Law 1 review

Mark Alvin Delizo

Remedial Law vs Substantive Law
Substantive Law - Substantive law creates
substantive rights and the two terms in this
respect may be said to be synonymous.
Substantive rights in a term which includes
those rights which one enjoys under the
legal system prior to the disturbance of
normal relations. (60 C.J. 980.)
Substantive law is that part of the law which
creates, defines and regulates rights, or
which regulates the right and duties which
give rise to a cause of action; that part of the
law which courts are established to
administer; as opposed to adjective or
remedial law, which prescribes the method
of enforcing rights or obtain redress for their
invasions (36 C.J. 27; 52 C.J.S. 1026).
Remedial Law – Is a law that which
prescribes the method of enforcing rights or
obtains redress for their invasion. (36 C. J.,
27; 52 C. J. S., 1026.)
The power to make procedural rules is
vested to the Supreme Court by the 1987
Constitution whilst the power to create
Substantive law is vested to the Congress.
Prospective Effect of the Rules of
Court/ Retroactive Application of
Rules of Court
Jurisprudence states that procedural laws are
construed to be applicable to actions
pending and undetermined at the time of
their passage, and are deemed retroactive in
that sense and to that extent.
As a general rule, the retroactive application
of procedural laws cannot be considered
violative of any personal rights because no
vested right may attach to nor arise
therefrom.
The rules of court are not Penal Laws and
are not to be given retroactive effect
(Bermejo vs Barrios, G.R. No. L-23614)
When procedural rules do not apply
in pending actions
The exception to the rule of retroactive
application of procedural rules are as
follows:
1. where the statute itself expressly or
by necessary implication provides
that pending actions are excepted
from its operation;
2. apply it to pending proceedings
would impair vested rights;
3. to do so would not be feasible or
would work injustice;
4. if to do so would involve intricate
problems of due process or impair
the independence of the courts.
(Tan, jr. vs CA, G.R. No. 136368)
Rule making power of the Supreme
Court
The basis of the rule making power of the
Supreme court is the Constitution,
specifically Section 5(5), Article VIII, the
section states:
The Supreme Court shall have the following
powers:
(5) Promulgate rules concerning the
protection and enforcement of constitutional
rights, pleading, practice, and procedure in
all courts, the admission to the practice of
law, the Integrated Bar, and legal assistance
to the underprivileged. Such rules shall
provide a simplified and inexpensive
procedure for the speedy disposition of
cases, shall be uniform for all courts of the
same grade, and shall not diminish, increase,
or modify substantive rights. Rules of
procedure of special courts and quasi-
judicial bodies shall remain effective unless
disapproved by the Supreme Court.
It has the sole prerogative to amend, repeal
or even establish new rules for a more
simplified and inexpensive process and
speedy disposition of cases. The 1987
constitution took away the power of
Congress to repeal, alter or supplement rules
concerning pleading, practice and procedure.
Power of the Supreme Court to
suspend the Rules of Court