Lawyerly

You're currently signed in as:
User

REPUBLIC v. CA

This case has been cited 6 times or more.

	GR No. 179756 2009-10-02	RIZAL COMMERCIAL BANKING CORPORATION v. ROYAL CARGO CORPORATION CARPIO MORALES, 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.[31]
	GR No. 162868 2008-07-14	RODOLFO D. GARCIA v. PHILIPPINE AIRLINES REYES, R.T., J.
Where material facts or questions, which were in issue in a former action, were judicially determined, such facts are res judicata.[38] In Stilianopulos v. City of Legaspi,[39] the Court held that "(w)hen a right or fact has been judicially tried and determined by a court of competent jurisdiction or an opportunity for such trial has been given, the judgment of the court, as long as it remains unreversed, should be conclusive upon the parties and those in privity with them. Clearly, there should be an end to litigation by the same parties and their privies over a subject, once it is fully and fairly adjudicated."
	GR No. 163360 2007-06-08	HEIRS OF IGMEDIO* MAGLAQUE v. CA QUISUMBING, J.
Material facts or questions which were in issue in a former action and were there admitted or judicially determined are conclusively settled by a judgment rendered therein and that such facts or questions become res judicata.[26] Here, the resolution of the second complaint hinges on the validity of the foreclosure sale. Ultimately, the ownership of the contested parcel of land will depend on the propriety of the aforementioned sale. Judgment on this issue of validity has already been rendered and accorded finality as shown by the entry of judgment dated August 16, 1999 in Supreme Court case G.R. No. 109472.[27]
	GR NO. 157557 2006-03-10	REPUBLIC v. RAMON YU
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. [13]
	GR No. 157616 2005-07-22	ISIDRO PEREZ v. CA CALLEJO, SR., J.
(a) finality of the former judgment; (b) the court which rendered it had jurisdiction over the subject matter and the parties; (c) it must be a judgment on the merits; and (d) there must be, between the first and second actions, identity of parties, subject matter and causes of action.[31] A judgment or order is on the merits of the case when it determines the rights and liabilities of the parties based on the ultimate facts as disclosed by the pleadings or issues presented for trial. It is not necessary that a trial, actual hearing or argument on the facts of the case ensued. For as long as the parties had the full legal opportunity to be heard on their respective claims and contentions, the judgment or order is on the merits.[32] An order of the trial court on the ground that the complaint does not state a cause of action is a determination of the case on its merits.[33] Such order whether right or wrong bars another action based upon the same cause of action.[34] The operation of the order as res judicata is not affected by a mere right of appeal where the appeal has not been taken or by an appeal which never has been perfected.[35]
	GR No. 136834 2001-08-15	FELIX SENDON v. FRATERNIDAD O. RUIZ QUISUMBING, J.
We also concur with the lower courts' view that there is identity of parties in Civil Case No. 1800 / Civil Case No. K-111 and in the present case, Civil Case No. 3670. For purposes of res judicata, we have held that only substantial identity of parties is required and not absolute identity.[14] There is substantial identity of parties when there is community of interest between a party in the first case and a party in the second case even if the latter was not impleaded in the first case.[15] In other words, privity or a shared identity of interest is sufficient to invoke application of the principle of res judicata.[16]