The difference between enforceable sentence and res judicata in the COGEP

Abstract

The purpose of this investigation was to carry out an analysis of the difference between an executory sentence and res judicata in the COGEP. The methodology used was framed within a bibliographic-documentary research, as a result of which various digital platforms of indexed journals, libraries of national and international universities and portals of national jurisprudence bodies were accessed where various texts of national doctrine and foreigner on the matter. For the analysis of the information collected, the analytical-interpretive reading technique was used. In general terms, certain differences are specified between the executory sentence and res judicata, such as: the executory sentence will be executed after meeting certain legal requirements such as the non-existence of pending appeals, because the period of time established to file them has elapsed or others, while res judicata constitutes a special quality assigned by law to some enforceable sentences. Res judicata may present a material and formal category.  In this way, the effects of the executory sentence with the authority of material res judicata present characteristics of being insusceptible and imposes the impossibility of opening a new process, given that it puts an end to the controversy raised in the trial and, the executory sentence with the authority of formal res judicata, may become doubtful or debatable in a subsequent process to achieve a different result than that reached in the first trial in which the conflict was not satisfactorily resolved.