RES JUDICATA- the Latin term for "a matter [already] judged", and may refer to two things:

things: in both
civil law and common law legal systems, a case in which there has been a final judgment and is no longer
subject to appeal.[1]; and the term is also used to refer to the legal doctrine meant to bar (or preclude)
continued litigation of such cases between the same parties, which is different between the two legal
systems. In this latter usage, the term is synonymous with"preclusion".

Elements of Res Judicata

The former judgment must be final

Judgment must be on the merits of the case

The former decision is rendered by the court having jurisdiction over the subject.

There is similar identity of parties, subject matter and cause of action for both cases.

Cause of action - defined as "an act or omission of second party in violation of the legal right or rights of
the other, and its essential elements are legal right of the plaintiff, correlative obligation of the
defendant, and act or omission of the defendant in violation of said legal right."

TEST FOR APPLICATION OF RES JUDICATA

In the application of the doctrine of res judicata, if it is doubtful whether a second action is for the same
cause of action as the first, the test generally applied is to consider the Identity of facts essential to their
maintenance, or whether the same evidence would sustain both. If the same facts or evidence would
sustain both, the two actions are considered the same within the rule that the judgment in the former is
a bar to the subsequent action. If, however, the two actions rest upon different states of facts, or if
different proofs would be required to sustain the two actions, a judgment in one is no bar to the
maintenance of the other.

two distinct concepts of res judicata: (1) bar by former judgment and (2) conclusiveness of judgment.

“The first aspect is the effect of a judgment as a bar to the prosecution of a second action upon the
same claim, demand or cause of action. In traditional terminology, this aspect is known as merger or
bar; in modern terminology, it is called claim preclusion.
“The second aspect precludes the relitigation of a particular fact of issue in another action between the
same parties on a different claim or cause of action. This is traditionally known as collateral estoppel; in
modern terminology, it is called issue preclusion.

“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. The fact or
question settled by final judgment or order binds the parties to that action (and persons in privity with
them or their successors-in-interest), and continues to bind them while the judgment or order remains
standing and unreversed by proper authority on a timely motion or petition; the conclusively settled fact
or question furthermore cannot again be litigated in any future or other action between the same
parties or their privies and successors-in-interest, in the same or in any other court of concurrent
jurisdiction, either for the same or for a different cause of action. Thus, only the identities of parties and
issues are required for the operation of the principle of conclusiveness of judgment.”

UDGMENT;RES JUDICATA; ELEMENTS THEREOF CITED. —There are four (4) essential conditions which
must concur in order thatres judicatamayeffectively apply,viz.:(1) The judgment sought to bar the new
action must be ?nal; (2) thedecision must have been rendered by a court having jurisdiction over the
subject matterand the parties; (3) the disposition of the case must be a judgment or order on the
merits;and (4) there must be between the ?rst and second action identity of parties, identity ofsubject
matter, and identity of causes of action.

Res judicata refers to the rule that 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.5

The elements of res judicata are as follows: (1) the former judgment or order must be final; (2) the
judgment or order must be on the merits; (3) it must have been rendered by a court having jurisdiction
over the subject matter and the parties; (4) there must be, between the first and the second action,
identity of parties, of subject matter and cause of action.6

For res judicata to apply, all the above essential requisites must exist.

the doctrine of res judicata applies only to judicial or quasi-judicial proceedings, not to the exercise of
administrative powers.42 In Montemayor v. Bundalian,43 the Court sustained the President's dismissal
from service of a Regional Director of the Department of Public Works and Highways (DPWH) who was
found liable for unexplained wealth upon investigation by the now defunct Philippine Commission
Against Graft and Corruption (PCAGC). The Court categorically ruled therein that the prior dismissal by
the Ombudsman of similar charges against said official did not operate as res judicata in the PCAGC case.

Res judicata (RJ) or res iudicata, also known as claim preclusion, is the Latin term for "a matter decided"
and refers to either of two concepts in both civil law and common law legal systems: a case in which
there has been a final judgment and is no longer subject to appeal; and the legal doctrine meant to bar
(or preclude) relitigation of a claim between the same parties.

Angelo Gambiglioni, De re iudicata, 1579

In the case of res judicata, the matter cannot be raised again, either in the same court or in a different
court. A court will use res judicata to deny reconsideration of a matter.[1]

The doctrine of res judicata is a method of preventing injustice to the parties of a case supposedly
finished but perhaps also or mostly a way of avoiding unnecessary waste of resources in the court
system. Res judicata does not merely prevent future judgments from contradicting earlier ones, but also
prevents litigants from multiplying judgments, and confusion.