Short answer. Yes. Philippine law requires the suspension of any civil action or proceeding when either party expresses willingness to discuss a possible compromise, or when one party had offered to do so before the case was filed but was refused. The court has no discretion to refuse this suspension.
What the law says
Every civil action or proceeding shall be suspended: (1) If willingness to discuss a possible compromise is expressed by one or both parties; or (2) If it appears that one of the parties, before the commencement of the action or proceeding, offered to discuss a possible compromise but the other party refused the offer.
Civil Code, Article 2030 — Suspension for Compromise. Read the full provision →
What the law actually says
Article 2030 of the Civil Code is mandatory, not permissive. It states that every civil action or proceeding shall be suspended in two situations: first, if either party expresses willingness to explore a compromise while the case is already ongoing; second, if one side had already offered to talk settlement before filing, but the other party turned that offer down. In the second scenario, the party who was refused can use that prior offer to trigger a suspension even after the case has started.
Who can trigger the suspension
Either party may raise the issue — plaintiff or defendant. The statute says "one or both parties," so you do not need the other side's cooperation to signal willingness. If you are the defendant and you want the parties to explore settlement, you can express that willingness to the court and the suspension should follow. Conversely, if you filed the case and the defendant now signals openness to compromise, the suspension applies equally. The law does not require a formal written motion, but in practice it is safer to put the request on the record.
How long does the suspension last, and what happens during it
The duration and terms of the suspension are governed by the rules the Supreme Court has issued. The statute also authorizes the appointment of amicable compounders — neutral persons who help the parties reach an agreement. During the suspension period, the parties are expected to negotiate in good faith. If no compromise is reached within the time the court allows, the case resumes from where it left off. The suspension does not waive any rights, erase evidence, or reset prescription periods that were already interrupted by the filing.
What a compromise agreement does once signed
If the parties do reach a compromise, it can be submitted to the court for approval and judgment. A court-approved compromise has the effect of res judicata — it ends the dispute with finality, enforceable like any court judgment. This is why a suspension to allow genuine settlement talks is often worth requesting: a negotiated outcome tends to be faster, cheaper, and more reliably enforced than a litigated one. That said, no one can force you to settle, and the court cannot compel either party to agree to any particular terms.
Cases citing this provision
These Supreme Court decisions cite the provision above. We list them so you can read them yourself; the summaries of what each decided are not ours to give.
- Alfonso T. Yuchengco, et al. vs. The Honorable Sandiganbayan, et al, G.R. No. 149802, January 20, 2006 — read the decision on LawPhil →
- Rizal Commercial Banking Corporation vs. Magulin Marketing Corporation, et al, G.R. No. 152878, May 5, 2003 — read the decision on LawPhil →