Forum Shopping

When forum shopping exists.

             Forum shopping exists when, as a result of an adverse judgment in one forum, a party seeks another and possibly favorable judgment in another forum other than by appeal or special civil action for certiorari. There is also forum shopping when a party institutes two or more actions or proceedings grounded on the same cause, on the gamble that one or the other court would make a favorable disposition. (Mun. of Taguig v. CA, G.R. No. 142619, September 13, 2005, 469 SCRA 588; Fels Energy, Inc. v. The Province of Batangas, et al., G.R. No. 168557, February 16, 2007).

 Factor that determines the existence of forum shopping.

             An important factor in determining the existence of forum shopping is the vexation caused to the courts and the parties-litigants by the filing of similar cases to claim substantially the same reliefs. The rationale against forum shopping is that a party should not be allowed to pursue simultaneous remedies in two different fora. Filing multiple petitions or complaints constitutes abuse of court processes, which tends to degrade the administration of justice, wreaks havoc upon orderly judicial procedure, and adds to the congestion of the heavily burdened dockets of the courts. (Wee v. Galvez, G.R. No. 147394, August 11, 2004, 436 SCRA 96; Fels Energy Inc. v. Province of Batangas, et al., G.R. No. 168557, February 16, 2007).

             There is forum shopping when there exist: (a) identity of parties, or at least such parties as represent the same interests in both actions, (b) 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 the pending case, regardless of which party is successful, would amount to res judicata in the other. (Fels Energy, Inc. v. The Province of Batangas, et al.).