G.R. No. 92326 . January 24, 1992.
REPUBLIC OF THE PHILIPPINES, petitioner, vs. COURT OF APPEALS and ZENAIDA C. BOBILES, respondents.

FACTS

On February 2, 1988, Zenaida C. Bobiles filed a petition to adopt the minor Jason Condat, who had been living with her family since infancy. The petition was filed solely in her name under the then-governing law, Presidential Decree No. 603 (The Child and Youth Welfare Code), which allowed adoption by either spouse. The Regional Trial Court granted the petition after finding compliance with all jurisdictional requirements and that the adoption served the child’s best welfare. The Republic, through the Solicitor General, appealed, arguing that while the case was pending on appeal, the Family Code (Executive Order No. 209) took effect on August 3, 1988. Under Article 185 of the new Code, joint adoption by husband and wife is mandatory. The petitioner thus contended the petition should be dismissed for being filed by Mrs. Bobiles alone, insisting the Family Code should apply retroactively.

ISSUE

Whether the Family Code, which mandates joint adoption by spouses, applies retroactively to dismiss a petition for adoption validly filed by a spouse alone under the prior law.

RULING

No. The Supreme Court denied the petition and affirmed the adoption. The Court held that the right of private respondent to file the adoption petition singly under PD 603 was a vested right at the time of filing. A vested right is a present, fixed interest protected against arbitrary impairment. Article 246 of the Family Code itself provides for retroactive application only if it does not prejudice or impair vested rights. The trial court acquired jurisdiction under the substantive law in force at the commencement of the action, and a change in law during appeal does not divest that jurisdiction. Furthermore, adoption statutes are humane and salutary, designed to promote the child’s best interests. The Court found no jurisdictional defect, as the non-joinder of the husband was not a fatal flaw under the applicable law when filed, and the paramount welfare of the child Jason Condat was convincingly served by the decree of adoption.