A general rule in this jurisdiction is that a judgment based on a compromise agreement is not questionable and immediately executed, unless an application is filed for fraud, error or coercion. (De los Reyes vs. Ugarte, 75 Phil. 505; Lapena vs. Morfe, R.G. No. L-10089, 31 July 1957)Chanrobles Virtual Law Library The Philippine Civil Code (Civil Code) defines compromise as “a treaty in which the parties, through reciprocal concessions, avoid litigation or end a process already begun” (Article 2028). In a number of cases, the Supreme Court held that a judicial compromise was final and that it was a judgment based on the merits of the case. SECTION 1. How the verdict was delivered.
– all cases that determine the merits of cases are prepared and signed by the judge himself and directly, the facts and law on which it is based being clearly set out and filed with the Tribunal Administrator. “And as with any other treaty, the terms of a compromise agreement must not be contrary to law, morality, morality, public order and public order. Any compromise agreement contrary to law or public order is null and void and has no right and does not consider any obligation for any party. It has no legal value. A compromise agreement between the parties is binding and becomes law between them. (Gonzales vs. Gonzales G.R. No. L-1254, May 21, 1948, 81 Phil. 38; Martin versus Martin, G.R. L-12439, May 22, 1959) .chanroblesvirtuallibrarychanrarychanrobles virtual legal library In this case for certiorari and prohibition with injunction, it appears from the record that the defendant judge of the Agusan Trial Court issued a judgment (annex “A”) on January 28, 1959, in an open court based on a compromise between the parties.
, in 1958 respondent Grace Park Engineering, Inc. an out-of-court foreclosure procedure for the mortgage. To do so, the petitioner initiated civil action No. 53 before the Agusan Magistrates Court. The parties to the case reached a compromise agreement and presented it in writing, signed by Pastor D.