Вы находитесь на странице: 1из 1


City of Cebu vs Dedamo determined by a court of competent jurisdiction, or

when an opportunity for such trial has been given, the
Facts: judgment of the court, as long as it remains unreversed,
should be conclusive upon the parties and those in
The City of Cebu (COC) exercised its power of eminent privity with them. Stated differently, conclusiveness of
domain over the land of Spouses Dedamo. The COC judgment bars the re-litigation in a second case of a fact
immediately took possession of the subject property or question already settled in a previous case.
after depositing an amount of 51,000.00. During the
pendency of the case in the CA, COC and Dedamo The adjudication in G.R. No. 172942 has become
binding and conclusive on the petitioner who can no
spouses entered to a compromise agreement for the
longer question the respondents entitlement to the
just compensation which was approved by the RTC. 12% legal interest awarded by the CA.
When the decision became final and executor, a motion
for the issuanc of a writ of execution was filed by the The Courts determination in G.R. No. 172942 on the
Spouses Dedamo, RTC granted the Motion. reckoning point of the 12% legal interest is likewise
binding on the petitioner who cannot re-litigate the said
In the meantime, Dedamo spouses passed away and matter anew through the present recourse.
they were substituted by their heirs. Thereafter,
Dedamo Heirs, filed a manifestation and Motion before Thus, the judgment in G.R. No. 172942 bars the present
the RTC to order to pay interest on the just case as the relief sought in the latter is inextricably
related to the ruling in the former.
compensation computed from the time of the actual
taking of the lands. RTC denied the motion and rules WHEREFORE, premises considered, the Petition is
that it can no longer amend a final and executor hereby DENIED.
judgment that did not specifically direct payment of
legal interest on the unpaid balance from the taking and
from the time the decision has been final and

Dedamo appealed to CA (GR No. 142791) and it partially

granted the petition, it held that the COC shall pay 12%
per annum legal interest to Dedamo from the the time
the decision became final and executory.

COC filed a petition for review in certiorari before the

SC, COC prays for the annulment if award of 12% legal
interest made by the CA in the GR No. 142791.

Issue: W/N COC may have the award be annulled in the

GR No. 142791.

Held: No.

The petition is denied on the ground of res judicata in

the mode of conclusiveness of judgment.

A perusal of the allegations in the present case

evidently shows that the petitioner broaches the issues
similarly raised and already resolved in G.R. No. 172942.

Under the principle of conclusiveness of judgment,

when a right or fact has been judicially tried and