I. Overview

In Philippine law, a compromise judgment occupies a special place: it is both a contract (a compromise agreement under the Civil Code) and a final judgment of a court (under the Rules of Court).

Because of this dual nature, questions often arise when a party seeks to enforce or revive a compromise judgment many years after it was rendered:

Is the judgment already barred by prescription?
Should it be enforced by motion or by independent action?
Can it still be treated as a contract and enforced as such?
What defenses can the opposing party raise after a long delay?

This article walks through everything essential on the topic, with focus on Philippine law and procedure.

II. Legal Foundations

1. Compromise under the Civil Code

Articles 2028–2037 of the Civil Code govern compromise:

Art. 2028: A compromise is a contract whereby the parties, by making reciprocal concessions, avoid litigation or put an end to one already commenced.
It is valid and binding upon the parties, with the force of law between them.
Certain matters cannot be compromised, such as civil status, validity of marriage, legal separation, future support, jurisdiction, and future legitime (Art. 2035).

Once a compromise is approved by a court and embodied in a judgment, it becomes a judgment upon compromise.

2. Judgment Upon Compromise under the Rules of Court

A compromise judgment is:

A final judgment on the merits because it ends litigation.
Typically not appealable, since parties voluntarily agreed to its terms.
Subject to execution in the same manner as any other final judgment, governed by Rule 39 of the Rules of Court.

Its contractual nature means that doctrines of contracts (consent, cause, object, rescission, novation, etc.) apply, while its judgment nature means execution, prescription of judgments, res judicata also apply.

III. Nature and Effects of a Compromise Judgment

1. Dual Character: Contract + Judgment

Because of its dual character, a compromise judgment can be:

Enforced as a judgment – via Rule 39 (execution by motion or by independent action for revival).
Assailed or enforced as a contract – via actions such as:
- Annulment/rescission of contract for vitiated consent, fraud, mistake, lesion in certain cases, or substantial breach.
- Specific performance to compel compliance with contractual obligations.

The Supreme Court has repeatedly emphasized that a compromise judgment has more binding force than a simple contract because it is cloaked with judicial approval.

2. Res Judicata

A compromise judgment is conclusive between the parties as to the matters compromised. It has the effect of res judicata:

Parties generally cannot relitigate issues settled in the compromise.
Attacks must be direct (e.g., action to annul the judgment or compromise agreement), not mere collateral attacks in unrelated proceedings.

IV. Time Limits: Execution and Revival

To understand enforcement “after many years,” the key concepts are entry, execution by motion, and execution by independent action, plus prescription under the Civil Code.

1. Entry of Judgment

After a compromise is approved and judgment is issued, it becomes final and executory (often immediately, depending on the terms and the court’s order). Once final, it is entered in the book of entries of judgment.

Under Rule 39, time for execution by motion is counted from the date of entry of judgment.

2. Execution by Motion: Within 5 Years

Under Rule 39:

Within five (5) years from the date of entry of judgment, the judgment may be enforced by motion in the same case.
Execution within this period is a matter of right (subject to compliance with the judgment’s terms and absence of supervening events making execution impossible or unjust).

Applied to compromise judgments:

If the compromise judgment is, say, entered on 1 January 2020, a motion for execution can be filed on or before 1 January 2025.
This is the simplest, most efficient way to enforce the compromise.

3. After 5 Years: Independent Action for Revival or Enforcement

After five years from the entry of judgment:

The judgment can no longer be enforced by motion.
It may be enforced only by filing an ordinary civil action – commonly called an action for revival of judgment or action to enforce judgment.

In such action:

The cause of action is the existing but unsatisfied judgment.
The plaintiff must plead and prove the existence of the final judgment and its non-satisfaction.
The court no longer re-examines the merits; it simply determines:
- the existence and validity of the judgment,
- whether it remains unsatisfied, and
- whether it is not yet barred by prescription or laches.

Once revived:

The new judgment (reviving the old one) is again enforceable by motion within five years, and by action within ten years, subject to rules on prescription.

4. Ten-Year Prescriptive Period: Action on a Judgment

Under Article 1144 of the Civil Code:

Actions upon a judgment must be brought within ten (10) years from the time the right of action accrues (usually from the date the judgment becomes final and executory).

Applied to compromise judgments:

An action to revive or enforce a judgment must generally be filed within 10 years from the finality of the original judgment.
After 10 years, the action on the judgment ordinarily prescribes and the judgment becomes practically unenforceable as a judgment.

So in practice:

0–5 years from entry: execution by motion.
>5 to ≤10 years: execution only by independent action (revival/enforcement).
>10 years: the action on the judgment is prescribed, subject to nuanced exceptions (e.g., interruption of prescription, continuing obligations, new causes of action).

V. Special Issues for Compromise Judgments After Many Years

When a long time has passed since the compromise judgment, several special questions arise.

1. Can the Compromise Still Be Enforced as a Contract After 10 Years?

Even if the action on the judgment is prescribed (after 10 years), litigants sometimes argue that:

The compromise is a written contract, and
An action for specific performance on that contract prescribes in 10 years from breach (also under Art. 1144).

This leads to nuanced scenarios:

If no breach occurred until much later (e.g., obligation becomes due long after the judgment), the 10-year period may be counted from the breach, not from the judgment.
Some obligations in a compromise judgment may be continuing (e.g., periodic support, installment payments, continuing easements). Each breach may give rise to a new cause of action.

However, courts are careful:

Where the core obligation is clearly that set forth in the judgment, and many years have passed with inaction, courts may regard attempts to re-label the enforcement as contractual as a way to circumvent the 10-year bar.
But in other cases, courts have allowed treating the compromise primarily as a contract when the relief sought is rescission, annulment, or specific performance not strictly tied to the original action.

In short: sometimes you may still proceed on the contract, but you must overcome arguments on prescription and laches, and show that the cause of action is not simply “action upon the judgment” but a distinct contractual breach arising later.

2. Continued or Installment Obligations

Where compromise judgments involve:

Installment payments,
Continuing obligations (e.g., to turn over produce annually, to render services periodically), or
Obligations dependent on a future event,

then:

Prescription may run separately for each installment or breach.
The right to enforce later installments may still be alive even if earlier installments have prescribed or the right to execute the original judgment has lapsed.
For older installments, the defense of prescription may be available; for more recent ones, it may not.

3. Interruption of Prescription

Prescription may be interrupted, for example, by:

Written extrajudicial demands (which can interrupt prescription and cause it to run anew).
Acknowledgment of debt by the debtor.
Filing of judicial actions (even if later dismissed without prejudice under certain conditions).

If the creditor can prove interruption, the 10-year period for an action upon the judgment or contract may be extended.

VI. Action for Revival of Judgment: Procedure and Requirements

When more than five years but less than ten years have passed from the entry of a compromise judgment, the proper recourse is an independent action to revive the judgment.

1. Nature of the Action

It is a personal action to enforce a judgment.
The court does not retry the original case; it simply recognizes that:
- there is an existing final judgment,
- it remains unsatisfied; and
- it is not yet prescribed.

2. Jurisdiction

Jurisdiction is determined by:

The amount of the judgment or nature of the relief.
If the amount claimed is within the first-level courts’ jurisdiction, it may be filed there; otherwise, in the Regional Trial Court (RTC).
For real actions (compromise involving real property), venue and jurisdiction rules for real actions apply (RTC if assessed value exceeds first-level court thresholds).

3. Venue

As a personal action (e.g., for sum of money), it may be filed where:
- the plaintiff resides, or
- the defendant resides.
If the revival action directly affects title to or possession of real property, it may be considered a real action, and venue would be where the property is located.

4. Allegations and Evidence

The complaint typically alleges:

The existence of a final and executory compromise judgment.
The date of entry and finality.
The obligations imposed under the judgment.
The failure or refusal of the defendant to comply.
That less than 10 years have elapsed since the right of action accrued (or that prescription has been interrupted, if applicable).

Evidence usually consists of:

Certified copies of the judgment upon compromise.
Entry of judgment.
Proof of non-performance (e.g., no payment, no transfer of property).
If relevant, demands, acknowledgments, or other documents interrupting prescription.

The court then renders a new judgment ordering the defendant to comply with the terms of the original judgment (or updated equivalent), which can itself be executed by motion and later revived if necessary.

VII. Defenses Against Revival or Late Enforcement

A defendant facing an attempt to enforce or revive a compromise judgment after many years commonly raises:

1. Prescription

Action upon the judgment filed after 10 years from finality is time-barred.
For contractual claims, 10-year prescription from breach (Art. 1144) may also be invoked.

2. Laches

Even if not yet technically prescribed, a claim can be defeated by laches:

Inequitable delay in asserting a right,
Combined with prejudice to the defendant (e.g., loss of documents, death of key witnesses, changed circumstances),
May lead courts to deny enforcement.

Laches is an equitable defense; it is not the same as prescription but often overlaps in late-enforcement cases.

3. Payment or Satisfaction

The defendant can prove that the judgment has already been satisfied (fully or partially).
Proof may be receipts, acknowledgments, or other documentation.
Partial satisfaction can reduce liability; complete satisfaction bars the action.

4. Novation

If the parties subsequently modified the compromise:

For example, they execute a new agreement prescribing a different mode or schedule of payment, or substitute a new debtor or creditor.
This may constitute novation of the original obligation.
The cause of action may then be on the new agreement, and the old judgment may no longer be enforceable in its original terms.

5. Invalidity or Annulment of Compromise

If there are grounds, a party may attack the validity of the compromise agreement and/or judgment based on:

Lack of consent, fraud, mistake, violence, intimidation or undue influence.
Lack of authority of counsel to enter into the compromise.
Compromise on prohibited matters (e.g., future support, civil status).

This is typically done through:

Action for annulment or rescission of the compromise (and, where appropriate, the judgment), or
Motions under the Rules of Court within the appropriate time frames (e.g., petition for relief from judgment, action for annulment of judgment under Rule 47 in the Court of Appeals, etc.).

In a revival action, the defendant may argue that the underlying compromise was void or voidable and has been properly annulled or rescinded.

6. Supervening Events Making Execution Unjust or Impossible

Even for enforcement by motion (within 5 years), courts may deny or modify execution when supervening events have rendered execution:

Unjust (e.g., drastic change in circumstances through no fault of the debtor, supervening illegality), or
Impossible (e.g., property destroyed without fault of the debtor, performance objectively impossible).

In revival actions, similar considerations may be invoked, though they often relate more to equitable defenses such as laches or impossibility.

VIII. Compromise Judgments in Special Contexts

While the basic principles above apply generally, certain areas have their own nuances.

1. Compromise in Criminal Cases (Civil Aspect Only)

The civil liability in a criminal case (e.g., indemnity, damages) may be subject to compromise.
When approved by the criminal court, the compromise on civil liability is embodied in a judgment, enforceable like any other judgment.
Execution and revival rules (5-year motion, 10-year action) apply to the civil aspect.

2. Labor Cases

In labor disputes, compromise agreements approved by the NLRC, DOLE, or labor arbiters likewise have binding effect and can be enforced through writs of execution issued by the labor tribunals.
However, procedural rules and prescriptive periods may differ (Labor Code, NLRC Rules).
Still, the underlying philosophy is similar: a compromise approved by a competent tribunal has the force of a judgment.

3. Barangay Settlement (Katarungang Pambarangay)

A settlement reached at the barangay level and approved by the Punong Barangay or Pangkat has the effect of a final judgment after the lapse of repudiation periods.
Enforcement may proceed in regular courts, but special procedural rules apply under the Katarungang Pambarangay Law.
Again, issues of prescription and enforcement after many years will invoke both the special law and the general Civil Code and Rules of Court principles.

IX. Practical Guidance

For practitioners dealing with attempt to enforce or revive an old compromise judgment in the Philippines:

If You Represent the Creditor / Winning Party

Determine key dates:
- Date of judgment.
- Date of finality and entry.
- Date of last payment or acknowledgment.
- Dates of any written demands or interruption events.
Check the 5-year and 10-year rules:
- Within 5 years → file motion for execution.
- Beyond 5 but within 10 → file action for revival of judgment or specific performance depending on strategy.
- Beyond 10 → explore:
  - Contractual angle (continuing obligations, new causes of action),
  - Interruption of prescription,
  - Subsequent novation or acknowledgments.
Collect and preserve evidence:
- Certified copies of judgment, entry, orders.
- Receipts, acknowledgments, demand letters.
- Any documents showing interruption of prescription or novation.
Anticipate defenses:
- Prepare to counter arguments on prescription, laches, payment, invalidity, and supervening events.

If You Represent the Debtor / Losing Party

Compute prescription and highlight delay:
- Show clearly if more than 10 years have passed without valid interruption.
- Emphasize unreasonable delay to support laches.
Prove satisfaction or partial compliance:
- Produce receipts, sworn statements, or other proof of payments or performance.
- Seek accounting of what is actually still due, if any.
Check for novation or new agreements:
- If there was a later arrangement, assert that the original judgment has been superseded.
Consider attacking the compromise:
- If the compromise was defective (e.g., lack of authority of counsel, vitiated consent, compromise on prohibited matters), explore appropriate annulment or rescission.

X. Conclusion

In the Philippines, enforcing or reviving a compromise judgment after many years is primarily governed by:

The Civil Code rules on compromise and prescription, and
The Rules of Court on execution and revival of judgments.

The broad framework is:

Within 5 years from entry – enforce by motion for execution.
After 5 but within 10 years – enforce only by an independent action to revive/enforce the judgment.
After 10 years – the judgment is ordinarily barred by prescription as a judgment, but there may still be room for:
- Contractual remedies based on the compromise as a contract,
- New causes of action (e.g., continuing obligations),
- Arguments on interruption of prescription.

Because compromise judgments have a dual nature—contract and judgment—their enforcement after many years often involves creative legal framing, precise computation of prescriptive periods, careful pleading, and strong evidence to overcome (or assert) defenses of prescription, payment, laches, novation, and invalidity.