Lawyerly

You're currently signed in as:
User

OROPEZA MARKETING CORPORATION v. ALLIED BANKING CORPORATION

This case has been cited 8 times or more.

	GR No. 167050 2011-06-01	SOCIAL SECURITY COMMISSION v. RIZAL POULTRY PEREZ, J.
The elements of res judicata are: (1) the judgment sought to bar the new action must be final; (2) the decision must have been rendered by a court having jurisdiction over the subject matter and the parties; (3) the disposition of the case must be a judgment on the merits; and (4) there must be as between the first and second action, identity of parties, subject matter, and causes of action. Should identity of parties, subject matter, and causes of action be shown in the two cases, then res judicata in its aspect as a "bar by prior judgment" would apply. If as between the two cases, only identity of parties can be shown, but not identical causes of action, then res judicata as "conclusiveness of judgment" applies.[18]
	GR No. 168139 2009-01-20	FERDINAND S. AGUSTIN v. SPS. MARIANO AND PRESENTACION DELOS SANTOS PUNO, C.J.
Res judicata is defined as "a matter adjudged; a thing judicially acted upon or decided; a thing or matter settled by judgment."[17] According to the doctrine of res judicata, an existing final judgment or decree rendered on the merits, and 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.[18] To state simply, a final judgment or decree on the merits by a court of competent jurisdiction is conclusive of the rights of the parties or their privies in all later suits on all points and matters determined in the former suit.[19]
	GR No. 179127 2008-12-24	IN-N-OUT BURGER v. SEHWANI CHICO-NAZARIO, J.
The Court will no longer touch on the issue of the validity or propriety of the 22 December 2003 Decision of the IPO Director of Legal Affairs which: (1) directed the cancellation of the certificate of registration of respondent Sehwani, Incorporated for the mark "IN-N-OUT" and (2) ordered respondents to permanently cease and desist from using the disputed mark on its goods and business. Such an issue has already been settled by this Court in its final and executory Decision dated 15 October 2007 in G.R. No. 171053, Sehwani, Incorporated v. In-N-Out Burger,[44] ultimately affirming the foregoing judgment of the IPO Director of Legal Affairs. That petitioner has the superior right to own and use the "IN-N-OUT" trademarks vis-à-vis respondents is a finding which this Court may no longer disturb under the doctrine of conclusiveness of judgment. In conclusiveness of judgment, any right, fact, or matter in issue directly adjudicated or necessarily involved in the determination of an action before a competent court in which judgment is rendered on the merits is conclusively settled by the judgment therein and cannot again be litigated between the parties and their privies whether or not the claims, demands, purposes, or subject matters of the two actions are the same.[45]
	GR No. 150470 2008-08-06	SPS. FELIPE AND VICTORIA LAYOS v. FIL-ESTATE GOLF CHICO-NAZARIO, J.
Res judicata literally means "a matter adjudged; a thing judicially acted upon or decided; a thing or matter settled by judgment." Res judicata lays the rule that an existing final judgment or decree rendered on the merits, and 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.[37]
	GR No. 151243 2008-04-30	LOLITA R. ALAMAYRI v. PABALE CHICO-NAZARIO, J.
Res judicata literally means "a matter adjudged; a thing judicially acted upon or decided; a thing or matter settled by judgment." Res judicata lays the rule that an existing final judgment or decree rendered on the merits, and 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.[10]
	GR NO. 166177 2006-12-18	HERBERT WILLIAMS CHICO-NAZARIO, J.
Res judicata literally means, "a matter adjudged; a thing judicially acted upon or decided; a thing or matter settled by judgment." Res judicata lays the rule that an existing final judgment or decree rendered on the merits, and 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.[17]
	GR NO. 157557 2006-03-10	REPUBLIC v. RAMON YU
Res judicata literally means "a matter adjudged; a thing judicially acted upon or decided; a thing or matter settled by judgment." [11] Res judicata lays the rule that an existing final judgment or decree rendered on the merits, and 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. [12]