This case has been cited 3 times or more.
|
2013-01-30 |
REYES, J. |
||||
| In Heirs of Maximino Derla v. Heirs of Catalina Derla Vda. de Hipolito,[57] we enumerated the following as the elements of res judicata: a) The former judgment or order must be final; b) It must be a judgment or order on the merits, that is, it was rendered after a consideration of the evidence or stipulations submitted by the parties at the trial of the case; c) It must have been rendered by a court having jurisdiction over the subject matter and the parties; and d) There must be, between the first and second actions, identity of parties, of subject matter and of cause of action. This requisite is satisfied if the two (2) actions are substantially between the same parties.[58] | |||||
|
2012-07-04 |
MENDOZA, J. |
||||
| This Court has held time and again that a final and executory judgment, no matter how erroneous, cannot be changed, even by this Court. Nothing is more settled in law than that once a judgment attains finality, it thereby becomes immutable and unalterable. It may no longer be modified in any respect, even if such modification is meant to correct what is perceived to be an erroneous conclusion of fact or law, and regardless of whether the modification is attempted to be made by the court rendering it or by the highest court of the land.[35] | |||||
|
2011-08-22 |
PERALTA, J. |
||||
| Anent petitioners' first contention, res judicata literally means "a matter adjudged; a thing judicially acted upon or decided; a thing or matter settled by judgment."[13] It lays the rule that an existing final judgment or decree rendered on the merits, without fraud or collusion, by a court of competent jurisdiction, upon any matter within its jurisdiction, is conclusive of the rights of the parties or their privies, in all other actions or suits in the same or any other judicial tribunal of concurrent jurisdiction on the points and matters in issue in the first suit.[14] | |||||