Aruego Jr. vs. Court of Appeals, A. Aruego (G.R. No.

112193 March 13, 1996)

FACTS: On March 7, 1983, a complaint for compulsory recognition and enforcement of

successional rights was filed before RTC of Manila by the minors Antonio F. Aruego and Evelyn
F. Aruego, represented by their mother Luz Fabian. The complaint was averse by the legitimate
children of Jose Aruego Jr. who died on March 30, 1982. Their claim there is open and
continuous possession of status of illegitimate children of Jose who had an amorous
relationship with their mother Luz Fabian until the time of his death.

The court then rendered judgment that Antonia Aruego is an illegitimate child of the deceased
Luz Fabian while Evelyn is not. Antonia was declared entitled to have a share equal to ½ portion
of the legitimate children of Jose Aruego. A petition for prohibition and certiorari with prayer for a
writ of preliminary injunction was then filed alleging that the Family Code of the Philippines
which took effect on August 3, 1988 shall have a retroactive effect thereby the trial court lost
jurisdiction over the complaint on the ground of prescription.

ISSUE: Whether or not the Family Code shall have a retroactive effect in the case.

RULING: NO. The Supreme Court upheld that the Family Code cannot be given retroactive
effect in so far as the instant case is concerned as its application will prejudice the vested rights
of respondents to have her case be decided under Article 285 of the Civil Code. It is a well
settled reception that laws shall have a retroactive effect unless it would impair vested rights.
Therefore, the Family Code in this case cannot be given a retroactive effect.

Prescinding from this, the conclusion then ought to be that the action was not yet barred,
notwithstanding the fact that it was brought when the putative father was already deceased,
since private respondent was then still a minor when it was filed, an exception to the general
rule provided under Article 285 of the Civil Code. Hence, the trial court, which acquired
jurisdiction over the case by the filing of the complaint, never lost jurisdiction over the same
despite the passage of E.O. No. 209, also known as the Family Code of the Philippines.