Doctrine of Operative Fact- Acts done pursuant to a law which was subsequently declared unconstitutional remain valid, but not when the acts are done after the declaration of unconstitutionality.
As a general rule, an unconstitutional act is not a law; it confers no rights; it imposes no duties; it affords no protection; it creates no office; it is inoperative as if it has not been passed at all. The general rule is supported by Article 7 of the Civil Code.1
Exception to the general rule, the doctrine of operative fact:
The Doctrine of Operative Fact serves as an exception to the aforementioned general rule. In Planters Products, Inc. vs. Fertiphil Corporation 2, the Cout held: The doctrine of operative fact, as an exception to the general rule only applies as a matter of equity and fair play. It nullifies the effects of an unconstitutional law by recognizing that the existence of a statute prior to a determination of unconstitutionality is an operative fact and may have consequences that which cannot always be ignored. The past cannot always be erased by a new judicial declaration. The doctrine is applicable when a declaration of unconstitutionality will impose an undue burden on those who have relied on the invalid law. Thus, it was applied to a criminal case when a declaration of unconstitutionality would put the accused in double jeopardy or would put in limbo the acts done by a municipality in reliance upon the law creating it. 3
1Yap vs. Thenamaris Ship's Management, G.R. No. 179532, May 30, 2011
2G.R. No. 166006, March 14, 2018
3Yap vs. Thenamaris Ship's Management, G.R. No. 179532, May 30, 2011
Spotify 
iTunes 
AppleMusic 
YouTube 
