Lawyerly

GR No. 195654

2015-11-25

DEL CASTILLO, J.

Article 2028 of the Civil Code defines a compromise agreement as a contract whereby the parties make reciprocal concessions in order to avoid litigation or put an end to one already commenced. If judicially approved, it becomes more than a binding contract; it is a determination of a controversy and has the force and effect of a judgment.[32] Article 227 of the Labor Code provides that any compromise settlement voluntarily agreed upon by the parties with the assistance of the Bureau of Labor Relations or the regional office of the Department of Labor and Employment shall be final and binding upon the parties. Compromise agreements between employers and workers have often been upheld as valid and accepted as a desirable means of settling disputes.[33]

GR No. 180147

2015-01-14

SARA LEE PHILIPPINES v. EMILINDA D. MACATLANG

PEREZ, J.

A compromise must not be contrary to law, morals, good customs and public policy; and must have been freely and intelligently executed by and between the parties.[13]

GR No. 190818

2014-11-10

METRO MANILA SHOPPING MECCA CORP. v. MS. LIBERTY M. TOLEDO

PERLAS-BERNABE, 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.[8] It contemplates mutual concessions and mutual gains to avoid the expenses of litigation; or when litigation has already begun, to end it because of the uncertainty of the result.[9] Its validity is dependent upon the 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.[10] When given judicial approval, a compromise agreement becomes more than a contract binding upon the parties. Having been sanctioned by the court, it is entered as a determination of a controversy and has the force and effect of a judgment. It is immediately executory and not appealable, except for vices of consent or forgery. The nonfulfillment of its terms and conditions justifies the issuance of a writ of execution; in such an instance, execution becomes a ministerial duty of the court.[11]

GR No. 174564

2014-02-12

ATTY. EMMANUEL D. AGUSTIN v. ALEJANDRO CRUZ-HERRERA

REYES, J.

Neither can a final judgment preclude a client from entering into a compromise. Rights may be waived through a compromise agreement, notwithstanding a final judgment that has already settled the rights of the contracting parties provided the compromise is shown to have been voluntarily, freely and intelligently executed by the parties, who had full knowledge of the judgment. Additionally, it must not be contrary to law, morals, good customs and public policy.[30]

GR No. 159709

2012-06-27

HEIRS OF SERVANDO FRANCO v. SPS. VERONICA AND DANILO GONZALES

BERSAMIN, J.

A novation arises when there is a substitution of an obligation by a subsequent one that extinguishes the first, either by changing the object or the principal conditions, or by substituting the person of the debtor, or by subrogating a third person in the rights of the creditor.[16] For a valid novation to take place, there must be, therefore: (a) a previous valid obligation; (b) an agreement of the parties to make a new contract; (c) an extinguishment of the old contract; and (d) a valid new contract.[17] In short, the new obligation extinguishes the prior agreement only when the substitution is unequivocally declared, or the old and the new obligations are incompatible on every point. A compromise of a final judgment operates as a novation of the judgment obligation upon compliance with either of these two conditions.[18]

GR No. 178591

2010-07-26

SM SYSTEMS CORPORATION v. OSCAR CAMERINO

NACHURA, J.

Once a case is terminated by final judgment, the rights of the parties are settled; hence, a compromise agreement is no longer necessary.[28] Though it may not be prudent to do so, we have seen in a number of cases that parties still considered and had, in fact, executed such agreement. To be sure, the parties may execute a compromise agreement even after the finality of the decision.[29] A reciprocal concession inherent in a compromise agreement assures benefits for the contracting parties. For the defeated litigant, obvious is the advantage of a compromise after final judgment as the liability decreed by the judgment may be reduced. As to the prevailing party, it assures receipt of payment because litigants are sometimes deprived of their winnings because of unscrupulous mechanisms meant to delay or evade the execution of a final judgment.[30]

GR No. 166866

2008-03-27

REPUBLIC v. ANTONIO

CORONA, J.

A compromise agreement is a contract whereby the parties make reciprocal concessions in order to resolve their differences and thus avoid litigation or to put an end to one already commenced.[28] When it complies with the requisites and principles of contracts, it becomes a valid agreement which has the force of law between the parties.[29] It has the effect and authority of res judicata once entered into,[30] even without judicial approval.[31]

GR No. 164403

2008-03-04

COSMOS BOTTLING CORPORATION v. PABLO NAGRAMA

REYES, R.T., J.

A compromise agreement is a contract whereby the parties make reciprocal concessions in order to resolve their differences and thus avoid or put an end to a lawsuit.[87] In forging a compromise, the parties adjust their difficulties in the manner they have agreed upon, disregarding the possible gain in litigation and keeping in mind that such gain is balanced by the danger of losing.[88]

GR No. 173562

2008-01-22

CENTRAL CEMENT CORPORATION v. MINES ADJUDICATION BOARD and ROCK

REYES, R.T., J.

Prescinding from Our ruling that the MOU was a valid compromise agreement between petitioner and private respondent, the terms of the MOU must be enforced. The MOU substitutes for a judgment on the merits and binds the parties. It is enforceable by a writ of execution. In Magbanua v. Uy,[57] the Court ruled:When a compromise agreement is given judicial approval, it becomes more than a contract binding upon the parties. Having been sanctioned by the court, it is entered as a determination of a controversy and has the force and effect of a judgment. It is immediately executory and not appealable, except for vices of consent or forgery. The nonfulfillment of its terms and conditions justifies the issuance of a writ of execution; in such an instance, execution becomes a ministerial duty of the court.

GR NO. 143721

2005-08-31

TERESITA E. VILLALUZ v. ROLANDO R. LIGON

AUSTRIA-MARTINEZ, J.

The Memorandum of Agreement between petitioner and respondent, while termed as such, is actually a compromise agreement which is defined as an agreement whereby the parties, by making reciprocal concessions, avoid a litigation or put an end to one already commenced.[49]

	GR No. 195654 2015-11-25	REYNALDO INUTAN v. NAPAR CONTRACTING DEL CASTILLO, J.
Article 2028 of the Civil Code defines a compromise agreement as a contract whereby the parties make reciprocal concessions in order to avoid litigation or put an end to one already commenced. If judicially approved, it becomes more than a binding contract; it is a determination of a controversy and has the force and effect of a judgment.[32] Article 227 of the Labor Code provides that any compromise settlement voluntarily agreed upon by the parties with the assistance of the Bureau of Labor Relations or the regional office of the Department of Labor and Employment shall be final and binding upon the parties. Compromise agreements between employers and workers have often been upheld as valid and accepted as a desirable means of settling disputes.[33]
	GR No. 180147 2015-01-14	SARA LEE PHILIPPINES v. EMILINDA D. MACATLANG PEREZ, J.
A compromise must not be contrary to law, morals, good customs and public policy; and must have been freely and intelligently executed by and between the parties.[13]
	GR No. 190818 2014-11-10	METRO MANILA SHOPPING MECCA CORP. v. MS. LIBERTY M. TOLEDO PERLAS-BERNABE, 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.[8] It contemplates mutual concessions and mutual gains to avoid the expenses of litigation; or when litigation has already begun, to end it because of the uncertainty of the result.[9] Its validity is dependent upon the 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.[10] When given judicial approval, a compromise agreement becomes more than a contract binding upon the parties. Having been sanctioned by the court, it is entered as a determination of a controversy and has the force and effect of a judgment. It is immediately executory and not appealable, except for vices of consent or forgery. The nonfulfillment of its terms and conditions justifies the issuance of a writ of execution; in such an instance, execution becomes a ministerial duty of the court.[11]
	GR No. 174564 2014-02-12	ATTY. EMMANUEL D. AGUSTIN v. ALEJANDRO CRUZ-HERRERA REYES, J.
Neither can a final judgment preclude a client from entering into a compromise. Rights may be waived through a compromise agreement, notwithstanding a final judgment that has already settled the rights of the contracting parties provided the compromise is shown to have been voluntarily, freely and intelligently executed by the parties, who had full knowledge of the judgment. Additionally, it must not be contrary to law, morals, good customs and public policy.[30]
	GR No. 159709 2012-06-27	HEIRS OF SERVANDO FRANCO v. SPS. VERONICA AND DANILO GONZALES BERSAMIN, J.
A novation arises when there is a substitution of an obligation by a subsequent one that extinguishes the first, either by changing the object or the principal conditions, or by substituting the person of the debtor, or by subrogating a third person in the rights of the creditor.[16] For a valid novation to take place, there must be, therefore: (a) a previous valid obligation; (b) an agreement of the parties to make a new contract; (c) an extinguishment of the old contract; and (d) a valid new contract.[17] In short, the new obligation extinguishes the prior agreement only when the substitution is unequivocally declared, or the old and the new obligations are incompatible on every point. A compromise of a final judgment operates as a novation of the judgment obligation upon compliance with either of these two conditions.[18]
	GR No. 178591 2010-07-26	SM SYSTEMS CORPORATION v. OSCAR CAMERINO NACHURA, J.
Once a case is terminated by final judgment, the rights of the parties are settled; hence, a compromise agreement is no longer necessary.[28] Though it may not be prudent to do so, we have seen in a number of cases that parties still considered and had, in fact, executed such agreement. To be sure, the parties may execute a compromise agreement even after the finality of the decision.[29] A reciprocal concession inherent in a compromise agreement assures benefits for the contracting parties. For the defeated litigant, obvious is the advantage of a compromise after final judgment as the liability decreed by the judgment may be reduced. As to the prevailing party, it assures receipt of payment because litigants are sometimes deprived of their winnings because of unscrupulous mechanisms meant to delay or evade the execution of a final judgment.[30]
	GR No. 166866 2008-03-27	REPUBLIC v. ANTONIO CORONA, J.
A compromise agreement is a contract whereby the parties make reciprocal concessions in order to resolve their differences and thus avoid litigation or to put an end to one already commenced.[28] When it complies with the requisites and principles of contracts, it becomes a valid agreement which has the force of law between the parties.[29] It has the effect and authority of res judicata once entered into,[30] even without judicial approval.[31]
	GR No. 164403 2008-03-04	COSMOS BOTTLING CORPORATION v. PABLO NAGRAMA REYES, R.T., J.
A compromise agreement is a contract whereby the parties make reciprocal concessions in order to resolve their differences and thus avoid or put an end to a lawsuit.[87] In forging a compromise, the parties adjust their difficulties in the manner they have agreed upon, disregarding the possible gain in litigation and keeping in mind that such gain is balanced by the danger of losing.[88]
	GR No. 173562 2008-01-22	CENTRAL CEMENT CORPORATION v. MINES ADJUDICATION BOARD and ROCK REYES, R.T., J.
Prescinding from Our ruling that the MOU was a valid compromise agreement between petitioner and private respondent, the terms of the MOU must be enforced. The MOU substitutes for a judgment on the merits and binds the parties. It is enforceable by a writ of execution. In Magbanua v. Uy,[57] the Court ruled:When a compromise agreement is given judicial approval, it becomes more than a contract binding upon the parties. Having been sanctioned by the court, it is entered as a determination of a controversy and has the force and effect of a judgment. It is immediately executory and not appealable, except for vices of consent or forgery. The nonfulfillment of its terms and conditions justifies the issuance of a writ of execution; in such an instance, execution becomes a ministerial duty of the court.
	GR NO. 143721 2005-08-31	TERESITA E. VILLALUZ v. ROLANDO R. LIGON AUSTRIA-MARTINEZ, J.
The Memorandum of Agreement between petitioner and respondent, while termed as such, is actually a compromise agreement which is defined as an agreement whereby the parties, by making reciprocal concessions, avoid a litigation or put an end to one already commenced.[49]

FELIPE O. MAGBANUA v. RIZALINO UY