F.

Fallo

Florentino vs. Rivera, G.R. No. 167968, Jan. 23, 2006

FACTS:

 Complaint filed before RTC by Riveras against Vicente Florentino for rescission, annulment,
redemption, reconveyance and damages in Civil Case No. 5761-M
 On its dispositive portion:
o Declaring lease of contract terminated
o Ordering defendant to turn over possession of leased premises to Rivera
o Ordering Florentino to pay Rivera annual lease rental and compensate in cash or in kind
for damage for unrealized annual harvest
o Ordering Florentino to pay Riveras and Mendozas attorney fees
o Dismissing for lack of merit counterclaims in original complaint
 Private respondents appealed for the decision and was granted by the appellate court
o CA found that the RTC abused its discretion in modifying dispositive portion of a final
and executory judgement
o Said modification substantially reduced amount of damage awarded to respondents
 From 100 cavans to only 16.5 cavans of palay, annually
 Petitioner in instant case challenged judgement and resolution of appellate tribunal
o There existed ambiguity in dispositive portion of trial court’s decision and text of
appellate courts judgement
o Orders of trial court merely clarified and quantified the decision sought to be executed
 Guidelines on contents on a proper dispositive portion
o Parties should know their rights and obligations
o Know how to execute decision under alternative contingencies
o No need for further proceedings to dispose of the issues
o Case should be terminated by according proper relief

HELD:

 If a decisions has acquired finality, as in this case, it becomes immutable and unalterable
o It can’t even correct erroneous conclusions of fact or law
 When there is conflict between fallo and body, fallo controls
o Rule rests on fallo being the final order while opinion in body is merely statement,
ordering nothing
 It is the dispositive portion that invests rights of parties, sets conditions for exercise of those
rights and imposes corresponding duties or obligations
 Light Rail Transit Authority v. CA, dispositive part settles and declares rights of parties
o Finally, definitively, and authoritatively, notwithstanding existence of inconsistent
statements in body
 What trial court did in this case
o Amend paragraph of dispositive portion of its final and executory judgement in order
that the same would conform to disquisitions contained in body of appellate courts
judgement