Scribd
Upload
374 views1 page

Legal Insights on Litis Pendentia

Catalan filed for annulment of her marriage to Mariscal in one court, claiming the marriage was void and seeking financial compensation. Mariscal then filed for annulment in another court. Catalan argued Mariscal's case should be dismissed due to litis pendentia, as the same issues were already being litigated in the first case. The appellate court agreed, as the elements of litis pendentia were met: the parties and issues were the same in both cases, and the judgment in one would result in res judicata in the other. Splitting a single cause of action into multiple suits is prohibited.

Uploaded by

Mark Alvin Delizo
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
374 views1 page

Legal Insights on Litis Pendentia

Catalan filed for annulment of her marriage to Mariscal in one court, claiming the marriage was void and seeking financial compensation. Mariscal then filed for annulment in another court. Catalan argued Mariscal's case should be dismissed due to litis pendentia, as the same issues were already being litigated in the first case. The appellate court agreed, as the elements of litis pendentia were met: the parties and issues were the same in both cases, and the judgment in one would result in res judicata in the other. Splitting a single cause of action into multiple suits is prohibited.

Uploaded by

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

Delizo, Mark Alvin

Mariscal vs CA, G.R. No. 123926. July 22, 1999.

Topic: Prohibition against splitting a single cause of action.

Ponente: Justice Bellosillo

Facts
Catalan filed a complaint with RTC of Iloilo for annulment of
marriage against Mariscal on the ground that it is void ab initio for having
no marriage license and for the marriage being bigamous. She also sought to
recover from Mariscal the sum of $32,000.00 she allegedly sent to him while
she was working as a nurse in the United States to buy properties as
investment for their future life together and damages.

Previously, Catalan also filed criminal complaints against Mariscal for


bigamy and perjury before the Iloilo courts. Mariscal filed his complaint
against Catalan in RTC of Digos seeking annulment of the marriage alleging
that he was forced to marry Catalan at gunpoint and there being no marriage
license, with Mariscal also prayed for damages.

Catalan moved for the dismissal of the complaint of Mariscal


invoking litis pendentia. The RTC of Digos denied such motion and the
subsequent motion for reconsideration. The CA on appeal reversed the
ruling of the RTC of Digos.

Issue: WON litis pendentia can be invoked by the Private respondent


Catalan.

Ruling
Yes. In Victronics Computers, Inc. v. RTC-Br. 63, Makati: It is a rule
that for litis pendentia to be invoked as ground for the abatement or
dismissal of an action, the concurrence of the fol-lowing requisites is
necessary: (a) identity of parties, or at least such as representing the same
interest in both actions; (b) identity of rights asserted and relief prayed for,
the relief being founded on the same facts; and, (c) the identity in the two (2)
cases should be such that the judgment that may be rendered in the pending
case would, regardless of which party is successful, amount to res judicata in
the other.

All the requisites of litis pendentia is present in this case.In litis


pendentia what is essential is the identity and similarity of the issues under
consideration. Both cases involves the same issues and same parties.

To interpose a cause of action in a counterclaim and again invoke it in


a complaint against the same person or party would be splitting a cause of
action not sanctioned by the Rules.

You might also like