Case Digest on Obligations and Contracts: Compromise Agreement - Alexander Gaisano v. Benjamin Akol G.R. No. 193840
Alexander Gaisano v. Benjamin Akol
G.R. No. 193840, June 15, 2011
Facts:
Akol filed a complaint for recovery of shares of stock against Gaisano. The RTC dismissed the complaint while the CA reversed the decision of the RTC. While the case was pending with the SC, the parties jointly filed an Agreement to Terminate Action duly signed by them and their respective counsels.
Issue: Whether the agreement filed by the parties allows the court to validly render judgment based on said agreement.
Ruling:
Yes. A compromise agreement is a contract whereby the parties make reciprocal concessions, avoid litigation, or put an end to one already commenced. Its validity depends on its fulfillment of the requisites and principles of contracts dictated by law; its terms and conditions being not contrary to law, morals, good customs, public policy and public order.
A scrutiny of the aforequoted agreement reveals it is a compromise agreement sanctioned under Article 2028 of the Civil Code. Its terms and conditions are not contrary to law, morals, good customs, public policy and public order. Hence, judgment can be validly rendered thereon.
Comments
Post a Comment