This case has been cited 3 times or more.
|
2015-11-23 |
DEL CASTILLO, J. |
||||
| It must be stressed that the remedy of annulment of judgment is only available under certain exceptional circumstances as this is adverse to the concept of immutability of final judgments.[40] Hence, it is allowed only on two grounds, i.e., extrinsic fraud and lack of jurisdiction.[41] | |||||
|
2015-08-19 |
BRION, J. |
||||
| In Antonino v. Register of Deeds of Makati,[24] the Court explained the nature of a petition for annulment of judgment and reiterated that it is only available under certain exceptional circumstances, since it runs counter to the general rule of immutability of final judgments, viz: Annulment of judgment is a recourse equitable in character, allowed only in exceptional cases as where there is no available or other adequate remedy. Rule 47 of the 1997 Rules of Civil Procedure, as amended, governs actions for annulment of judgments or final orders and resolutions, and Section 2 thereof explicitly provides only two grounds for annulment of judgment, i.e., extrinsic fraud and lack of jurisdiction. The underlying reason is traceable to the notion that annulling final judgments goes against the grain of finality of judgment. Litigation must end and terminate sometime and somewhere, and it is essential to an effective administration of justice that once a judgment has become final, the issue or cause involved therein should be laid to rest. The basic rule of finality of judgment is grounded on the fundamental principle of public policy and sound practice that at the risk of occasional error, the judgment of courts and the award of quasi-judicial agencies must become final at some definite date fixed by law.[25] (emphasis supplied) | |||||
|
2013-11-12 |
BERSAMIN, J. |
||||
| x x x The underlying reason is traceable to the notion that annulling final judgments goes against the grain of finality of judgment. Litigation must end and terminate sometime and somewhere, and it is essential to an effective administration of justice that once a judgment has become final, the issue or cause involved therein should be laid to rest. The basic rule of finality of judgment is grounded on the fundamental principle of public policy and sound practice that at the risk of occasional error, the judgment of courts and the award of quasi-judicial agencies must become final at some definite date fixed by law.[48] | |||||