Requisites of forum shopping explained - G.R. No. 187122

G.R. No. 187122

"x x x.

As regards the second issue, we likewise find no merit in petitioners’ claim that respondent’s act of filing a complaint with the Labor Arbiter while the same case was pending with the Office of the Commissioner of the MBA constituted forum shopping. 

For forum shopping to exist, it is necessary that (a) there be identity of parties or at least such parties that represent the same interests in both actions; (b) there be identity of rights asserted and relief prayed for, the relief being founded on the same facts; and (c) the identity of the two preceding particulars is such that any judgment rendered in one action will, regardless of which party is successful, amount to res judicata in the other action.[25]

Petitioners are correct as to the first two requisites of forum shopping. First, there is identity of parties involved: Negros Slashers Inc. and respondent Teng.  Second, there is identity of rights asserted i.e., the right of management to terminate employment and the right of an employee against illegal termination.  However, the third requisite of forum shopping is missing in this case.  Any judgment or ruling of the Office of the Commissioner of the MBA will not amount to res judicata.  As defined in Agustin v. Delos Santos,[26]

            Res Judicata is defined as “a matter adjudged; a thing judicially acted upon or decided; a thing or matter settled by judgment.” According to the doctrine of res judicata, an existing final judgment or decree rendered on the merits, and without fraud or collusion, by a court of competent jurisdiction, upon any matter within its jurisdiction, is conclusive of the rights of the parties or their privies, in all other actions or suits in the same or any other judicial tribunal of concurrentjurisdiction on the points and matters in issue in the first suit.  To state simply, a final judgment or decree on the merits by a court of competent jurisdiction is conclusive of the rights of the parties or their privies in all later suits on all points and matters determined in the former suit. (Emphasis supplied.)

To clarify, res judicata is defined in jurisprudence as to have four basic elements: (1) the judgment sought to bar the new action must be final; (2) the decision must have been rendered by a court having jurisdiction over the subject matter and the parties; (3) the disposition of the case must be a judgment on the merits; and (4) there must be as between the first and second action, identity of parties, subject matter, and causes of action.[27]

Here, although contractually authorized to settle disputes, the Office of the Commissioner of the MBA is not a court of competent jurisdiction as contemplated by law with respect to the application of the doctrine of res judicata.  At best, the Office of the Commissioner of the MBA is a private mediator or go-between as agreed upon by team management and a player in the MBA Player’s Contract of Employment.[28]   Any judgment that the Office of the Commissioner of the MBA may render will not result in a bar for seeking redress in other legal venues.  Hence, respondent’s action of filing the same complaint in the Regional Arbitration Branch of the NLRC does not constitute forum shopping.

x x x."