Scribd
Upload
87 views2 pages

Cabreza V Cabreza Jan 16 2012 Pocs 1

The Supreme Court reversed the Court of Appeals decision and reinstated the Regional Trial Court's ruling dismissing the complaint filed by the respondent Amparo Cabreza. The requisites for litis pendentia were present - the parties and issues were the same in both cases, and a judgment in one case would result in res judicata in the other. Specifically, Amparo's complaint sought to modify a final order from a previous case that had already authorized the sale of the conjugal dwelling, so it could not prosper under the doctrine of litis pendentia.

Uploaded by

RR F
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as DOC, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
87 views2 pages

Cabreza V Cabreza Jan 16 2012 Pocs 1

The Supreme Court reversed the Court of Appeals decision and reinstated the Regional Trial Court's ruling dismissing the complaint filed by the respondent Amparo Cabreza. The requisites for litis pendentia were present - the parties and issues were the same in both cases, and a judgment in one case would result in res judicata in the other. Specifically, Amparo's complaint sought to modify a final order from a previous case that had already authorized the sale of the conjugal dwelling, so it could not prosper under the doctrine of litis pendentia.

Uploaded by

RR F
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as DOC, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
You are on page 1/ 2

G.R. No.

181962               January 16, 2012

Cabreza v Cabreza

Topic: Property Relations

The following requisites must be present for the proper invocation of litis pendentia as a ground for
dismissing an action:

1. Identity of parties or representation in both cases;


2. Identity of rights asserted and relief prayed for, the relief being founded on the same facts
and the same basis; and

3. Identity of the two preceding particulars, such that any judgment that may be rendered in the
other action will, regardless of which party is successful, amount to res judicata in the action
under consideration.

Decision:

Lower Court: Dismissed complaint (for declaration of nullity of the Deed of Sale of a conjugal dwelling)

CA: Reverse RTC decision

SC: Reverse CA decision. Reinstated RTC ruling dismissing complaint

Facts:

1. Jan 2001, RTC of Pasig declared marriage between Ceferino (petitioner) and Amparo (respondent) as null
and void and ordered dissolution and liquidation of the conjugal partnership. Petitioner executed a deed of
absolute sale in favor of BJD Holdings Corp involving the conjugal dwelling. Petitioner asked the RTC to
authorized him to signed in behalf of the respondent and order the occupants to vacate the property.

2. Respondent countered by filling a Motion to Hold in Abeyance the Writ of Possession and Notice to Vacate,
arguing that (1) the parties had another conjugal lot apart from the conjugal dwelling; and (2) under Article
129 of the Family Code,4 the conjugal dwelling should be adjudicated to her as the spouse, with whom four
of the five Cabreza children were staying.

Issue:

 The CA erred in reversing the RTC decision by dismissing the complaint of declaring the nullity of Deed of
Sale on the basis of litis pendentia and forum shopping.

Basis:

1. CA erred in giving merit to the respondents argument. …We also take time to stress that the Complaint for
Declaration of Nullity of the Deed of Sale cannot prosper, because, like the Petition to nullify the Writ of
Possession, it effectively seeks the modification of an already final Order of RTC Br. 70. In view of this
Court’s consistent ruling that Amparo cannot be allowed to impugn the already final Order of RTC Br. 70
directing the sale of the conjugal dwelling, we deny the prayer for preliminary injunction to hold in
abeyance the implementation of the Notice to Vacate

You might also like