Doctrines: Cases 3.1-3.

3.1: Juana Complex Homeowners, et. al. vs. Fil-Estate Land, GR No. 152272, March 5, 2012

 Sec. 2, Rule 3 of the Rules of Court defines a cause of action as having 3 essential elements
o 1. The legal right of the plaintif
o 2. Correlative obligation of the defendant
o 3. Act/omission of the defendant in violation of said legal right
 Sec. 12, Rule 3 of the Rules of Court state the necessary elements for the maintenance of a class suit are:
o A. The subject matter of controversy is one of common or general interest to many persons
o B. Parties afected are so numerous that it is impracticable to bring them all to court
o C. Parties bringing the class suit are sufficiently numerous or representative of the class and can
fully protect the interest of all concerned
 The authority to issue writs of certiorari involves the exercise of original jurisdiction which must be expressly
conferred by the Constitution or by law and cannot be implied from the mere existence of appellate
jurisdiction.
 Requisites for Writ of Preliminary Injunction issuance are:
o 1. Existence of clear and unmistakable right that must be protected
o 2. An urgent and paramount necessity for the writ to prevent serious damage

3.2: Del Rosario vs. Far East Bank and Trust Company, G.R. No. 150134, October 31, 2007

 The case at bar satisfies the four essential requisites of bar by prior judgment:
o 1. Finality of the former judgment
o 2. The court which rendered it had jurisdiction over the subject matter and the parties
o 3. It must be a judgment on the merits
o 4. There must be, between the first and second actions, identity of parties, subject matter, and
causes of action.

3.3: Progressive Development Corp. vs. CA, 301 SCRA 367 (1999)

 Sec. 1, par (e), of Rule 16 of the Rules of Court which states that the pendency of another action between
the same parties for the same cause is a ground for dismissal of an action.
 Elements of Res Judicata :
o (a) Identity of parties or at least such as representing the same interest in both actions;
o (b) Identity of rights asserted and relief prayed for, the relief being founded on the same facts; and,
o (c) The identity in the two preceding particulars should be such that any judgment which may be
rendered on the other action will, regardless of which party is successful, amount to res judicata in
the action under consideration.
 Sec. 3 of Rule 2 provides that a party may not institute more than one suit for a single cause of action.
 Sec. 4 of Rule 2 provides if two or more suits are instituted on the basis of the same cause of action, the
filing of one or a judgment upon the merits in any one is available as a ground for the dismissal of the other
or others. "Cause of action" is defined by Sec. 2 of Rule 2 as the act of omission by which a party violates a
right of another.

3.4: Joseph vs. Bautista, 170 SCRA 540 (1989)

 Where there is only one delict or wrong, there is but a single cause of action regardless of the number of rights
that may have been violated belonging to one person.

3.5: Flores vs. Mallare-Phillipps, 144 SCRA 277 (1986)

 Causes of action in favor of the two or more plaintifs or against the two or more defendants should arise out of
the same transaction or series of transactions and there should be a common question of law or fact, as
provided in Section 6 of Rule 3.