Stare Decisis

-Villena vs. Sps. Chavez, G.R. No. 148126, November 10, 2003
Same; Judgments; Stare Decisis; Words and Phrases; When a court has laid down a principle of law as applicable to certain state
of facts, it will adhere to that principle and apply it to all future cases in which the facts are substantially the same; Stare decisis
simply means that for the sake of certainty, a conclusion reached in one case should be applied to those that follow if the facts
are substantially the same, even though the parties may be different.—We stress that when a court has laid down a principle of
law as applicable to a certain state of facts, it will adhere to that principle and apply it to all future cases in which the facts are
substantially the same. Stare decisis et non quieta movere. Stand by the decisions and disturb not what is settled. Stare decisis
simply means that for the sake of certainty, a conclusion reached in one case should be applied to those that follow if the facts
are substantially the same, even though the parties may be different. It proceeds from the first principle of justice that, absent
any powerful countervailing considerations, like cases ought to be decided alike.
-Olaguer vs. Military Commission No. 34, G.R. No. L-54558, May 22, 1987
Judgments; A doctrine that should be abandoned must be abandoned.—As stated earlier, We have been asked to re-examine a
previous ruling of the Court with a view towards abandoning or modifying the same. We do so now but not without careful
reflection and deliberation on Our part. Certainly, the rule of stare decisis is entitled to respect because stability in
jurisprudence is desirable. Nonetheless, reverence for precedent, simply as precedent, cannot prevail when constitutionalism
and the public interest demand otherwise. Thus, a doctrine which should be abandoned or modified should be abandoned or
modified accordingly. After all, more important than anything else is that this Court should be right.
Res Judicata
-Development Bank of the Philippines vs La Campaña Development Corporation, G.R. No. 137694, January 17, 2005
Remedial Law; Judgments; Res Judicata; 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; Elements of res judicata.—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. 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 actions, identity of parties, of subject
matter and of cause of action.
Law of the Case
-Sps. Sy vs Young, G.R. No. 169214, June 19, 2013
Remedial Law; Civil Procedure; Law of the Case; Words and Phrases; Law of the case has been defined as the opinion delivered
on a former appeal. It means that whatever is once irrevocably established the controlling legal rule of decision between the
same parties in the same case continues to be the law of the case whether correct on general principles or not, so long as the
facts on which such decision was predicated continue to be the facts of the case before the court.—Law of the case has been
defined as the opinion delivered on a former appeal. It means that whatever is once irrevocably established the controlling
legal rule of decision between the same parties in the same case continues to be the law of the case whether correct on general
principles or not, so long as the facts on which such decision was predicated continue to be the facts of the case before the
court. We point out in this respect that the law of the case does not have the finality of res judicata. Law of the case applies
only to the same case, whereas res judicata forecloses parties or privies in one case by what has been done in another case. In
law of the case, the rule made by an appellate court cannot be departed from in subsequent proceedings in the same case.
Furthermore, law of the case relates entirely to questions of law while res judicata is applicable to the conclusive determination
of issues of fact. Although res judicata may include questions of law, it is generally concerned with the effect of adjudication in a
wholly independent proceeding. The rationale behind this rule is to enable an appellate court to perform its duties satisfactorily
and efficiently, which would be impossible if a question, once considered and decided by it, were to be litigated anew in the
same case upon any and every subsequent appeal. Without it, there would be endless litigation. Litigants would be free to
speculate on changes in the personnel of a court, or on the chance of our rewriting propositions once gravely ruled on solemn
argument and handed down as the law of a given case. Sy vs. Young, 699 SCRA 8, G.R. No. 169214 June 19, 2013