Aguillon vs. Director of Lands

A procedural law may be applied to cases pending at the time of its enactment, provided it does not affect or change vested rights.

On July 29, 1908, Severo Aguillon filed a petition in the Court of Land Registration for the registration of certain parcels of land. The plans attached to the petition, marked as Exhibits A and B, had been prepared and finished on November 10, 1906, by private surveyors who had not been authorized by the Director of Lands or the Governor-General to make surveys for the registration of property in the Land Court. On November 14, 1908, the Attorney-General, representing the Insular Government, opposed the registration on the theory that the land belonged to the Government. The Director of Lands later amended this opposition, alleging that the plans presented by the petitioner had not been prepared in conformity with the provisions of Sections 4 and 5 of Act No. 1875.

Act No. 1875 took effect on July 1, 1908, nearly a month before Aguillon presented his petition. Section 4 of the Act requires surveyors to give advance notice to adjoining owners and to report objections, while Section 5 requires private surveyors to send their reports to the Bureau of Lands for verification and mandates that they pass a civil service or Bureau of Lands examination to be authorized to make surveys for the Court of Land Registration. Notwithstanding the opposition of the Director of Lands, the Court of Land Registration ordered the registration of the parcels of land in question.

From that decision, the Director of Lands appealed, assigning as error the lower court's admission of Exhibits A and B on the ground that they had not been prepared in conformity with Act No. 1875. Aguillon countered that because his plans had been prepared long before the enactment of the Act, applying it to his case would give the law a retroactive effect.

• Retroactivity of Act No. 1875: Petitioner argued that because his plans had been prepared long before the enactment of Act No. 1875, the Act should not apply, as doing so would give the law a retroactive effect. He cited Article 3 of the Civil Code and rules 1 and 2 of the Transitory Provisions of the Civil Code in support of this contention.

• Applicability of Act No. 1875: Whether Act No. 1875 applies to the petitioner's land registration case, given that the plans were prepared before the Act took effect.

• Applicability of Act No. 1875: Yes. The Act applies because it was already in effect when the petition was filed and merely regulates procedure and the character of evidence, which does not affect vested rights.

• Applicability of Act No. 1875: The law does not have a retroactive effect because it only applies to cases begun in the Court of Land Registration after its enactment. The law had been in force for nearly a month prior to the commencement of the present action. Furthermore, the law only relates to procedure—specifically, the character of the evidence which the petitioner must present in support of his claim. It is a well-established doctrine that the procedure of the court may be changed at any time and become effective at once, so long as it does not affect or change vested rights. Because Act No. 1875 is procedural in nature and the petition was filed after its effectivity, the plans must conform to its requirements.

• Prospectivity of Procedural Laws — A law regulating court procedure may be changed at any time and become effective immediately, even applying to pending cases, provided it does not affect or change vested rights. The Court applied this doctrine to hold that Act No. 1875, which prescribed the manner and qualifications for making land surveys for registration, was procedural and thus applicable to a petition filed after the Act's effectivity, even if the plans were prepared before the Act was enacted.

• "It is a doctrine well established that the procedure of the court may be changed at any time and become effective at once, so long as it does not affect or change vested rights." — This passage articulates the ratio decidendi for why Act No. 1875 was deemed applicable, establishing the rule on the immediate effectivity of procedural laws.

• Section 4, Act No. 1875 — Requires surveyors to give advance notice to adjoining owners of the date and hour of survey, report objections, and define boundaries with temporary monuments.
• Section 5, Act No. 1875 — Requires private surveyors to comply with Section 4, send reports to the Bureau of Lands for verification, and pass a civil service or Bureau of Lands examination to be authorized to make surveys for the Court of Land Registration.
• Article 3, Civil Code — Cited by the petitioner regarding the retroactive effect of laws, but the Court found Act No. 1875 not to be retroactive.
• Rules 1 and 2, Transitory Provisions of the Civil Code — Cited by the petitioner regarding the retroactivity of laws, but deemed inapplicable because Act No. 1875 was procedural.

Arellano, C.J., Torres, Moreland, and Trent, JJ., concurred.