This case has been cited 3 times or more.
|
2011-09-12 |
BERSAMIN, J. |
||||
| A compromise agreement is a contract whereby the parties, by making reciprocal concessions, avoid a litigation or put an end to one already commenced.[19] It encompasses the objects specifically stated therein, although it may include other objects by necessary implication,[20] and is binding on the contracting parties, being expressly acknowledged as a juridical agreement between them.[21] It has the effect and authority of res judicata upon the parties.[22] | |||||
|
2010-06-23 |
LEONARDO-DE CASTRO, J. |
||||
| Jurisprudence provides that the concept of res judicata embraces two aspects.[24] The first, known as "bar by prior judgment," or "estoppel by verdict," is the effect of a judgment as a bar to the prosecution of a second action upon the same claim, demand or cause of action.[25] The second, known as "conclusiveness of judgment," otherwise known as the rule of auter action pendent, ordains that issues actually and directly resolved in a former suit cannot again be raised in any future case between the same parties involving a different cause of action.[26] The bar by prior judgment requires the following elements to be present for it to operate: (1) A former final judgment that was rendered on the merits; | |||||
|
2010-02-12 |
ABAD, J. |
||||
| Conclusiveness of judgment or auter action pendent ordains that issues actually and directly resolved in a former suit cannot be raised anew in any future case involving the same parties although for a different cause of action. Where the rule applies, there must be identity of issues but not necessarily identity in causes of action.[26] | |||||