Retroactive application
Retroactive application legal meaning, translation and judicial precedents.
Meaning & Judicial Interpretation: (اردو مفہوم اور قانونی تشریح)
As a general rule, courts look with favour upon remedial and curative enactments, which were beneficial in nature and were interpreted in the context of the evil to be cured and the mischief to be remedied
Provisions of such enactments were to be liberally construed so as to advance the remedy and suppress the mischief and to ensure that the legislative intent, in such behalf, was not frustrated
Remedial and curative statutes generally were retroactive in their application and applied to pending proceedings
In the absence of the express words to the contrary, such enactments should not ordinarily be construed to destroy vested rights, create new liabilities and obligations or disturb past and closed transactions
With regard to judgments passed prior to enactment of a remedial or curative statute, the finality thereof may be disturbed and destroyed during the pendency of appeal there-against, if such was the intention of the Legislator, which could be fairly gathered from the express words employed in the remedial or curative enactment.
"Retroactive application", Pakistan Law Portal, available at: https://paklawportal.com/words-terms-maxims/124955845
Precedents & Case Laws citing "Retroactive application"
1975 S C M R 423
ABDUL MAJID-Petitioner Versus THE SETTLEMENT COMMISSIONER KARACHI AND OTHERS — Respondents
Court: -.-- S. 4 sub-s. (3) as inserted by Displaced Persons Laws Amendment Ordinance (XIII of 1964), S. 3---Property allotted to petitioner, P. T. O. issued, and entire evaluation price paid-Subsequent change in law and Chief Settlement Commissioner empowered to determine whether properties were or were not evacuee trust property-Chief Settlement Commissioner setting aside allotment to petitioner and declaring property as evacuee trust property-Settlement Authorities having no jurisdiction to determine such question prior to enforcement of amending law, Chief Settlement Commissioner, held, could not be a said to have re-opened matter already decided by competent authority- Case not of retroactive application of law.P L D 1988 Peshawar 40
KHAIRUL BASHAR‑‑Petitioner Versus MUHAMMAD TXRIQ KHAN and 2 others Respondents
Court: High CourtP L D 1969 Supreme Court 187
ADNAN AFZAL‑Appellant Versus CAPT. SHER AFZAL‑Respondent
Court:1999 S C M R 92
MUHAMMAD AFZAL — Appellant Versus KARACHI ELECTRIC SUPPLY CORPORATION and 2 others — Respondents
Court: Supreme Court of Pakistan1982 C L C 2399
DARAZ ALI AND OTHERS‑Petitioners Versus NATHU KHAN‑Respondent
Court: LahoreP L D 1984 Peshawar 25
Mst. NOOR‑UN‑NISA AND ANOTHER‑Petitioners Versus MUHAMMAD SARWAR AND 6 OTHERS‑Respondents
Court: S. 12(2)‑Suit, challenging decree obtained on basis of fraud and collusion, instituted much before amendment of S. 12(2)‑Amendment of S. 12(2) brought during pendency of suit, held, has no application Suit if dismissed for seeking remedy by filing application under S. 12(2) same would result unnecessary expenses and inconvenience to both parties.‑Interpretation of statutes.2002 Y L R 2885
ZAKA ULLAH and 16 others‑‑‑Petitioners; Versus MUHAMMAD ILYAS and another‑‑‑Respondents
Court: Lahore2012 SCMR 864
SENIOR MEMBER BOR and others — Appellants Versus Sardar BAKHSH BHUTTA and another — Respondents
Court: Supreme Court of Pakistan1986 C L C 1883
MUHAMMAD SIDDIQ MAZHARI‑‑Appellant Versus Mst. MEHAR RAZZ and another‑‑Respondents
Court: Karachi1998 M L D 1264
THE STATE — Appellant Versus PIR MAZHARUL HAQ and others — Respondents
Court: Karachi