o res judicata or prescription (statute of limitations)

- not waivable

Q: Distinguish res judicata from litis pendentia.

A: Although the two are related in that they both contemplate two or more actions filed
by the same parties on the basis of the same action, the difference is that in res
judicata, one of the suits has already been settled. Adjudication in one suit bars the
filing of another suit with identical parties and based on identical causes of action.
88

Res judicata:
According to the doctrine of res judicata, it was highlighted “a final judgment or decree on the
merits by a court of competent jurisdiction is conclusive of the rights of the parties or their privies
in all later suits on all points and matters determined in the former suit.”
The elements for res judicata to apply were found as follows:
(a) the former judgment was final;
(b) the court that rendered it had jurisdiction over the subject matter of the parties;
(c) the judgment was based on the merits;
and (d) between the first and the second actions, there was an identity of parties, subject matters,
and causes of action.
Further, it was highlighted res judicata embraces two concepts:
(1) bar by prior judgment and
(2) conclusiveness of judgment.
Bar by prior judgment exists "when, as between the first case where the judgment was rendered
and the second case that is sought to be barred, there is identity of parties, subject matter, and
causes of action."
On the other hand, the concept of conclusiveness of judgment finds application "when a fact or
question has been squarely put in issue, judicially passed upon, and adjudged in a former suit by
a court of competent jurisdiction." This principle only needs identity of parties and issues to
apply.
Prescription:

Article 1146 of the Civil Code states the time when an injured party may claim damages due to a quasi-delict.
It says:

“The following actions must be instituted within four years:

(1) Upon an injury to the rights of the plaintiff;

(2) Upon a quasi-delict;

xxx”

In order for you to file a claim for damages in court, you should have filed your case within four (4) years
after the accident. It appears that since you failed to file any action to claim for damages on the accident that
occurred twenty three (23) years ago, your action has already prescribed. This means that you cannot file any
action for damages against the bus company anymore.

Prescription:
o res judicata or prescription (statute of limitations)
- not waivable

Q: Distinguish res judicata from litis pendentia.

A: Although the two are related in that they both contemplate two or more actions filed by the
same parties on the basis of the same action, the difference is that in res judicata, one of the suits
has already been settled. Adjudication in one suit bars the filing of another suit with identical
parties and based on identical causes of action.
88
 Cause of action
A common example of failure to state a claim is in a personal injury claim based on negligence.
For instance, negligence requires that the defendant breached their duty of care to the plaintiff. If
the defendant did not actually owe a duty of care to the plaintiff, then the court might find a failure
to state a claim and immediately dismiss the case.

An example of this is where the plaintiff tries to sue the defendant for failing to help them repair
their car, where the defendant was under no contractual obligation to do so.

In cases where the failure to state a claim is based on a technical aspect, the court will sometimes
allow the plaintiff to amend their complaint, rather than dismiss the claim altogether.

Failure to state a cause of action refers to the insufficiency of the pleading, and is a ground for
dismissal under Rule 16 of the Rules of Court. On the other hand, lack of cause action refers to a
situation where the evidence does not prove the cause of action alleged in the pleading. x x x If
the allegations of the complaint do not aver the concurrence of the elements of cause of action,
the complaint becomes vulnerable to a motion to dismiss on the ground of failure to state a cause
of action. Evidently, it is not the lack or absence of a cause of action that is a ground for the
dismissal of the complaint but the fact that the complaint states no cause of action. Failure to
state a cause of action may be raised at the earliest stages of an action through a motion to
dismiss, but lack of cause of action may be raised at any time after the questions of fact have
been resolved on the basis of the stipulations, admissions, or evidence presented (MACASLANG
VS. ZAMORA [2011]).
Ex:

e the ultimate facts or the essential facts constituting the plaintiff’s cause of action. A fact is
essential if they cannot be stricken out without leaving the statement of the cause of action
inadequate.33 Since the inquiry is into the sufficiency, not the veracity, of the material allegations,
it follows that the analysis should be confined to the four corners of the complaint, and no other. 34

A judicious examination of petitioner’s Amended Complaint readily shows its failure to sufficiently
state a cause of action. Contrary to the findings of the CA, the allegations therein do not proffer
ultimate facts which would warrant an action for nullification of the sale and recovery of the
properties in controversy, hence,rendering the same dismissible.

**
o payment, waiver, abandonment, or extinguishment
o statute of frauds
- ART. 1403, N.C.C.

o non-compliance with a condition precedent

- e.g. failure to exhaust administrative remedies, or failure to undergo barangay conciliation

XX

It likewise bears stressing that a demurrer to evidence under Rule 33 is in the nature of a motion to
dismiss on the ground of insufficiency of evidence and is presented after the plaintiff rests its case. It
thus differs from a motion to dismiss under Rule 16 which is grounded on preliminary objections and
is presented at the outset of the case, that is, before a responsive pleading is filed by the movant and
within the period for the filing thereof.cralaw

77