Question:

What is forum shopping?

Answer:
Forum shopping is the institution of two or more actions or proceedings
involving the same parties for the same cause of action, either
simultaneously or successively, on the supposition that one or the other
court would make a favorable disposition. Forum shopping [is] resorted
to by any party against whom an adverse judgment or order has been
issued in one forum, in an attempt to seek a favorable opinion in
another, other than by appeal or a special civil action for [certiorari].

Question:
What are the elements of forum shopping?

Answer:
The test for determining the existence of forum shopping is whether a final
judgment in one case amounts to res judicata in another or whether the
following elements of litis pendentia are present: 

(a) identity of parties, or at least such parties as

representing the same interests in both actions; 
(b) identity of rights asserted and reliefs prayed for, the
relief being founded on the same facts; and 
(c) the identity of the two preceding particulars, such that
any judgment rendered in the other action will,
regardless of which party is successful, amount to res
judicata in the action under consideration. 

Said requisites are also constitutive of the requisites for auter action
pendant or lis pendens.

Question:
What is the purpose of the rule on forum shopping?

Answer:
The purpose is to avoid multiplicity of suits and to prevent a party from
instituting two or more actions or proceeding involving the same parties for
the same cause of action, either simultaneously or successively, on the
supposition that one or the other court would make a favorable disposition.
What is critical is the vexation brought upon the courts and the litigants by a
party who asks different courts to rule on the same or related causes and
grant the same or substantially the same reliefs and in the process creates
the possibility of conflicting decisions being rendered by the different fora
upon the same issues.

Question:
Did the Republic commit forum shopping in instituting the Complaint for
Cancellation of Reconstituted Title No. RT-6757?

Answer:
No. In filing the Cancellation of Reconstituted Title, what the Republic
seeks is the nullification of TCT No. RT-6757 for being fraudulent, the issue
being the validity of the reconstituted title itself. The Republic is not seeking
a judgment declaring it as the owner. 

On the other hand, the reliefs prayed in the reinvindicatoria case is the
declaration that Mariano Godinez is the exclusive and absolute owner of
Lot No. 937 and thus entitled to its possession. 

Given that there is no identity of reliefs, it is submitted that the Republic

could not have committed forum shopping.

Question:
What is splitting a single cause of action?

Answer:
Single cause of action or entire claim or demand cannot be split up or
divided into two or more different actions. The rule on prohibiting the
splitting of a single cause of action is clear. Section 4, Rule 2 of the Rules
of Court expressly states:

Section 4. Splitting a single cause of action; effect of. – If

two or more suits are instituted on the basis of the same
cause of action, the filing of one or a judgment upon the
merits in any one is available as a ground for the
dismissal of the others.

Question:
What is the purpose of splitting a single cause of action?

Answer:
The rule against splitting a single cause of action is intended "to prevent
repeated litigation between the same parties in regard to the same subject
of controversy; to protect defendant from unnecessary vexation; and to
avoid the costs and expenses incident to numerous suits."

Question:
Did the Republic violate the splitting of a single cause of action?

Answer:
No. As stated earlier, there is no identity or same subject of controversy.