This case has been cited 3 times or more.
|
2015-07-22 |
PERLAS-BERNABE, J. |
||||
| To lay down the basics, litis pendentia, as a ground for the dismissal of a civil action, refers to that situation wherein another action is pending between the same parties for the same cause of action, such that the second action becomes unnecessary and vexatious. For the bar of litis pendentia to be invoked, the following requisites must concur: (a) identity of parties, or at least such parties as represent the same interests in both actions; (b) identity of rights asserted and relief prayed for, the relief being founded on the same facts; and (c) the identity of the two preceding particulars is such that any judgment rendered in the pending case, regardless of which party is successful would amount to res judicata in the other.[31] The underlying principle of litis pendentia is the theory that a party is not allowed to vex another more than once regarding the same subject matter and for the same cause of action. This theory is founded on the public policy that the same subject matter should not be the subject of controversy in courts more than once, in order that possible conflicting judgments may be avoided for the sake of the stability of the rights and status of persons, and also to avoid the costs and expenses incident to numerous suits.[32] Consequently, a party will not be permitted to split up a single cause of action and make it a basis for several suits as the whole cause must be determined in one action.[33] To be sure, splitting a cause of action is a mode of forum shopping by filing multiple cases based on the same cause of action, but with different prayers, where the round of dismissal is litis pendentia for res judicata, as the case may be).[34] | |||||
|
2015-06-30 |
PERALTA, J. |
||||
| There is substantial identity of the parties when there is a community of interest between a party in the first case and a party in the second case albeit the latter was not impleaded in the first case.[38] Moreover, the fact that the positions of the parties are reversed, i.e., the plaintiffs in the first case are the defendants in the second case or vice-versa, does not negate the identity of parties for purposes of determining whether the case is dismissible on the ground of litis pendentia.[39] | |||||
|
2015-04-22 |
PERALTA, J. |
||||
| An indicium of the presence of, or the test for determining whether a litigant violated the rule against forum shopping is where the elements of litis pendentia are present or where a final judgment in one case will amount to res judicata in the other case.[21] | |||||