SECTION 1. Execution upon judgments or final orders.

— Execution shall issue as a matter of

right, on motion, upon a judgment or order that disposes of the action or proceeding upon the
expiration of the period to appeal therefrom if no appeal has been duly perfected. (1a)
If the appeal has been duly perfected and finally resolved, the execution may forthwith be
applied for in the court of origin, on motion of the judgment obligee, 1submitting therewith
certified true copies of the judgment or judgments or final order or orders sought to be enforced
and 3of the entry thereof, 4with notice to the adverse party.
The appellate court may, on motion in the same case, when the interest of justice so requires,
direct the court of origin to issue the writ of execution. (n)

----------

1. Execution is a matter of right of a final and immutable judgment. (Abrigo vs. Flores, G.R. No.
160786, June 17, 2013, 698 SCRA 559)

2. Exceptions: (a) matters of life, liberty, honor or property; (b) the existence of special or compelling
circumstances; (c) the merits of the case; (d) the cause not being entirely attributable to the fault or
negligence of the party favored by the suspension of the doctrine; (e) the lack of any showing that
the review sought is merely frivolous and dilatory; or (f) the other party will not be unjustly
prejudiced by the suspension. (Abrigo vs. Flores, G.R. No. 160786, June 17, 2013, 698 SCRA
559)

3. Under the doctrine of finality of judgment or immutability of judgment, a decision that has
acquired finality becomes immutable and unalterable, and may no longer be modified in
any respect, even if the modification is meant to correct erroneous conclusions of fact and
law, and whether it be made by the court that rendered it or by the Highest Court of the land. Any
act which violates this principle must immediately be struck down. (FGU Insurance Corporation
vs. Regional Trial Court of Makati City, Branch 66, G.R. No. 161282, February 23, 2011, 644
SCRA 50)

4. In addition, a final and executory judgment can no longer be amended by adding thereto a
relief not originally included. In short, once a judgment becomes final, the winning party is
entitled to a writ of execution and the issuance thereof becomes a court's ministerial duty.
The lower court cannot vary the mandate of the superior court or reexamine it for any other
purpose other than execution; much less may it review the same upon any matter decided on
appeal or error apparent; nor intermeddle with it further than to settle so much as has been
demanded.1

5. Exceptions to the Doctrine of Immutability of Judgment. – But like any other rule, it has
exceptions, namely: (1) the correction of clerical errors; (2) the so-called nunc pro tunc entries
which cause no prejudice to any party (Briones-Vasquez vs. Court of Appeals, G.R. No.
144882, February 4, 2005, 450 SCRA 482); (3) void judgments; and (4) whenever circumstances
transpire after the finality of the decision rendering its execution unjust and inequitable. ((FGU
Insurance Corporation vs. Regional Trial Court of Makati City, Branch 66, G.R. No. 161282,
February 23, 2011, 644 SCRA 50)

6. The general rule is that after a judgment has gained finality, it becomes the ministerial duty of the
court to order its execution. No court should interfere, by injunction or otherwise, to restrain such
execution. (Australian Professional Realty, Inc. vs. Municipality of Padre Garcia, Batangas
Province, 668 SCRA 253)

7. The remedy of a party from the trial court’s order granting the issuance of a writ of possession is to
file a petition to set aside the sale and cancel the writ of possession, and the aggrieved party may
then appeal from the order denying or granting said petition. (Producers Bank of the Philippines
(now First Producers Holdings Corporation) vs. Excelsa Industrial, Inc., 669 SCRA 470)

8. Execution of a judgment can only be issued against one who is a party in the action , and
not against one who, not being a party thereto, did not have his day in court. (Atilano II vs.
Asaoli, 680 SCRA 345)

9. An order of execution is not appealable. Rule 41 of the Revised Rules of Court states that no
appeal may be taken from an order of execution.

Exceptions to the Rule. – The general rule is that an order of execution is not appealable;
otherwise, a case would never end. 2 There are, however, exceptions to this rule, namely: (1) The

1
Tropical Homes v. Fortun, 251 Phil 83 (1989).
2
Buag v. Court of Appeals, 363 Phil. 216 (1999); Reburiano v. Court of Appeals, 361 Phil. 294
(1999); Imperial Insurance v. De Los Angeles, 197 Phil. 23 (1982); Corpus v. Alikpala, 130 Phil. 88
 writ of execution varies the judgment; (2) There has been a change in the situation of the parties
making execution inequitable or unjust; (3) Execution is sought to be enforced against property
exempt from execution; (4) It appears that the controversy has been submitted to the judgment of
the court; (5) The terms of the judgment are not clear enough and there remains room for
interpretation thereof; (6) It appears that the writ of execution has been improvidently issued, or
that it is defective in substance, or issued against the wrong party, or that the judgment debt has
been paid or otherwise satisfied, or the writ issued without authority. 3 In these exceptional
circumstances, considerations of justice and equity dictate that there be some remedy available to
the aggrieved party. The remedy may either be by appeal or by a special civil action of
certiorari, prohibition, or mandamus.4 (Philippine Gaming Corporation (PAGCOR) vs. Reyes,
G.R. No. 173634, July 22, 2010, 625 SCRA 241)

(1968).
3
Philippine Economic Zone Authority v. Borreta, G.R. No. 142669, 15 March 2006, 484 SCRA 664, 670 citing
Reburiano v. Court of Appeals, supra.
4
Reburiano v. Court of Appeals, supra note 15.