Short answer. It becomes valid from the time it was originally made. Article 1396 provides that ratification cleanses the contract from all its defects from the moment it was constituted, not merely from the date of ratification. The contract is treated as if it had been valid from the start.
What the law says
Ratification cleanses the contract from all its defects from the moment it was constituted.
Civil Code, Article 1396 — Retroactive Effect of Ratification. Read the full provision →
Ratification reaches back to the beginning
Article 1396 answers this directly: ratification cleanses the contract from all its defects from the moment it was constituted. That phrase, 'from the moment it was constituted,' is what settles the timing question. The contract is not treated as valid only starting on the date the party with the right to challenge it chose to ratify; it is treated as if the defect had never existed at all, reaching all the way back to when the parties originally entered into the agreement.
What 'cleanses from all its defects' actually does
This retroactive effect covers all the defects that made the contract voidable in the first place, not just some of them. Whatever ground existed for annulling the contract, whether a vice of consent, incapacity of one party, or another cause that makes a contract merely voidable rather than void, ratification wipes that defect away entirely, and it wipes it away as of the original date. The contract's history is treated as clean from the outset, not as a defective contract that was later patched up.
Why the law gives ratification this reach
Retroactivity makes sense once you consider what a voidable contract actually is: a contract that is valid and produces its effects unless and until the party entitled to challenge it exercises that right. Ratification is that party's decision not to challenge it, choosing instead to affirm the contract. Since the contract was never void from the start, only voidable, confirming it through ratification naturally restores it to the position it should have occupied all along, rather than creating a brand-new valid contract starting only from the ratification date.
What this means in practice
Because ratification retroacts to the original date, any rights, obligations, or transactions that depended on the contract being valid during the period between its execution and its ratification are treated as having been valid the whole time. This matters for things like the running of periods, the accrual of obligations under the contract, or dealings with third parties that occurred before the ratification took place, since none of those need to be revisited or treated as though they rested on a defective contract during that interval.
Cases citing this provision
These Supreme Court decisions cite the provision above. We list them so you can read them yourself; the summaries of what each decided are not ours to give.
- Jesus E. Ulay vs. Maranguyod Bustamante/Jesus E. Ulay vs. Salome Bustamante-Sarol, Heirs of Adelaida, G.R. No. 231721 / G.R. No. 231722, March 18, 2021 — read the decision on LawPhil →
- Atty. Leonardo Florent O. Bulatao vs. Zenaida C. Estonactoc, G.R. No. 235020, December 10, 2019 — read the decision on LawPhil →