Lawyerly

You're currently signed in as:
User

JOSE RIVERO v. CA

This case has been cited 4 times or more.

	GR No. 178312 2013-01-30	LAND BANK OF PHILIPPINES v. HEIRS OF SPS. JORJA RIGOR-SORIANO AND MAGIN SORIANO BERSAMIN, J.
There is no question that the foregoing Agreement was a compromise that the parties freely and voluntarily entered into for the purpose of finally settling their dispute in this case. Under Article 2028 of the Civil Code, a compromise is a contract whereby the parties, by making reciprocal concessions, avoid a litigation or put an end to one already commenced. Accordingly, a compromise is either judicial, if the objective is to put an end to a pending litigation, or extrajudicial, if the objective is to avoid a litigation. As a contract, a compromise is perfected by mutual consent. However, a judicial compromise, while immediately binding between the parties upon its execution, is not executory until it is approved by the court and reduced to a judgment.[15] The validity of a compromise is dependent upon its compliance with the requisites and principles of contracts dictated by law. Also, the terms and conditions of a compromise must not be contrary to law, morals, good customs, public policy and public order.[16]
	GR Nos. 183322 2009-10-30	GOV. ANTONIO P. CALINGIN v. CIVIL SERVICE COMMISSION CHICO-NAZARIO, J.
The validity of a compromise agreement is dependent upon its fulfillment of the requisites and principles of contracts dictated by law; and its terms and conditions must not be contrary to law, morals, good customs, public policy and public order.[12]
	GR No. 183965 2009-09-18	JOANIE SURPOSA UY v. JOSE NGO CHUA CHICO-NAZARIO, J.
It must be emphasized, though, that like any other contract, a compromise agreement must comply with the requisites in Article 1318 of the Civil Code, to wit: (a) consent of the contracting parties; (b) object certain that is the subject matter of the contract; and (c) cause of the obligation that is established. And, like any other contract, the terms and conditions of a compromise agreement must not be contrary to law, morals, good customs, public policy and public order. Any compromise agreement that is contrary to law or public policy is null and void, and vests no rights in and holds no obligation for any party. It produces no legal effect at all.[20]
	GR No. 182421 2008-10-06	UCPB GENERAL INSURANCE CORPORATION v. OWNER OF M NACHURA, J.
The validity of the agreement is determined by compliance with the requisites and principles of contracts. Like any other contract, the terms and conditions of a compromise agreement must not be contrary to law, morals, good customs, public policy and public order.[10]