RATIONALE:
Substantive laws cannot be retroactively applied.
Laws re court jurisdictions are substantive.
Jurisdictional laws are not remedial.
Time of filing determines jurisdiction.
GIST: Yu's case was filed in 1992 before RTC. R.A. 7691, granting jurisdiction to MTC, etc over cases with 6yrs penalty and below, was passed in 1994. Yu wants to apply this retroactively to dismiss the case for lack of jurisdiction. Since R.A. 7691 is substantive, not procedural or penal, it cannot be applied retroactively.
FACTS:
1. Elvura Yu Oh purchased but failed to pay pieces of jewelry from Solid Gold Internation Traders Inc.
2. Civil cases were filed before RTC Pasig.
3. 17 September 1990, E. Yu Oh and Gen. Manager Novales entered into a compromise agreement with the ff. conditions:
- E. Yu Oh will issue 99 post-dated checks with the amount of P50k each for every 15th and 30th of the month starting 01 October 1990.
- lump sum of P1,000,000.00 shall be paid on 16 November 1994, the due date of the 99th post-date check.
4. Yu Oh drew 10 checks of P50,000 each from her Equitable Banking Corp. Bank.
5. Novales deposited it to Far East Bank and Trust Company but said checks were dishonored by by reason of "account closed."
6. 5 October 1992, they filed 10 separate information for BP Blg. 22 violation / Bouncing Checks Law.
7. RTC found Yu Oh guilty. Yu Oh appealed to CA but it affirmed RTC's ruling.
8. Thus, this petition. Yu Oh alleges the RTC has no jurisdiction if the case and that no notice of dishonor was given to her.
ISSUE:
W/N Court of Appeals erred in not granting retroactive effect to R.A. 7691 in view of Art. 22 of the RPC.
RULING:
NO. CA did not err in not granting retroactive effect to R.A. 7691 in view of Art. 22 of the RPC.
R.A. 7691 which took effect on 15 June 1994, is substantive law, and not procedural or penal law. Retroactive effect with regard to Art. 22 of the RPC shall only be applied to penal laws. R.A. No. 7691 which is "An Act Expanding the Jurisdiction of the Municipal Trial Courts, Municipal Circuit Trial Courts, and Metropolitan Trial Court" which cases with punishment that is 6 years and below is now under their jurisdictions. Since R.A. 7691 is substantive law, neither procedural nor penal as it defined no crime and a penalty, and grants jurisdiction to MTCs, it cannot be applied retroactively. The jurisdiction of RTC over the case cannot be questioned since R.A. 7691 doesn't have a retroactive application. Neither was it expressly stated nor implied that it is to be understood to have a retroactive application to Criminal cases pending or decided by the RTC prior to its effectivity. Since R.A. 7691 vests jurisdiction on courts, it is apparent that it is substantive. Thus, the RTC's jurisdiction over the present case cannot be removed since it R.A. 7691 was only passed in 1994 and the case was filed in October 1992.
Although it cannot be retroactively applied as far as jurisdictions are concerned, Elvira Yu Oh is still acquitted since based on Novales' testimony, it appeared that he was told of the insufficiency of funds when Yu Oh issued the checks to him. There is no violation of BP Blg. 22 if the complainant was told by the drawer that he has no sufficient funds in the bank.
Comments
Post a Comment