Res judicata or bar by prior judgment is a doctrine which holds that a matter that has been adjudicated by a court of competent jurisdiction must be deemed to have been finally and conclusively settled if it arises in any subsequent litigation between the same parties and for the same cause. Res judicata exists when the following elements are present: (a) the former judgment must be final; (b) the court which rendered judgment had jurisdiction over the parties and the subject matter; (3) it must be a judgment on the merits; and (d) and there must be, between the first and second actions, identity of parties, subject matter, and cause of action.[113] (Emphasis supplied; citations omitted)Here, it should be noted that this Court denied the said Manifestation and Urgent Motion, and refused to act on the succeeding pleadings, for being moot.[114] Clearly, the merits of the motion were not considered by the Court. The following disquisition of the Court in Spouses Cruz v. Spouses Caraos is further enlightening:
The judgment of dismissal in Civil Case No. 95-1387 does not constitute res judicata to sufficiently bar the refiling thereof in Civil Case No. 96-0225. As earlier underscored, the dismissal was one without prejudice. Verily, it was not a judgment on the merits. It bears reiterating that a judgment on the merits is one rendered after a determination of which party is right, as distinguished from a judgment rendered upon some preliminary or formal or merely technical point. The dismissal of the case without prejudice indicates the absence of a decision on the merits and leaves the parties free to litigate the matter in a subsequent action as though the dismissed action had not been commenced.[115] (Emphasis supplied; citations omitted)Considering that there is definitely no forum shopping in the instant cases, we need not discuss in detail the elements of forum shopping.
No comments:
Post a Comment