In an ongoing case, parties may enter into a compromise agreement which when approved by the court becomes a determination of a controversy and has the force and effect of a judgment.
G.R. No. 190818, 10 November 2014
Petitioners Metro Manila Shopping Mecca Corp., Shoemart, Inc., SM Prime Holdings, Inc., Star Appliances Center, Super Value, Inc., Ace Hardware Philippines, Inc., Health and Beauty, Inc., Jollimart Phils. Corp., and Surplus Marketing Corporation, sought “the approval of the terms and conditions of the parties’ Universal Compromise Agreement dated 1 June 2012 (the “UCA”) in lieu of the Court’s Decision dated 05 June 2013 denying the petitioners claim for tax refund/credit of their local business taxes paid to respondent City of Manila.” Continue reading here.