Does res judicata have to be relied upon in deciding what questions were decided by the first proceedings?

Where res judicata is relied upon, in deciding what questions were decided by the first proceedings, the court is entitled to look not only at the formal judgment but also at the pleadings and the history of the proceedings (Pratt v. Johnson (1958), 1958 CanLII 79 (SCC), 16 D.L.R. (2d) 385 (S.C.C), at 399, per Cartwright J., in dissent but not on this point). An examination of the pleading in the Oregon action compared with the statement of claim in the case before this court confirms that the two actions deal with the identical matter. While the two claims, for obvious reasons, emphasize different facts, it is quite clear that both claims raise the same question – what are the continuing rights and obligations under the contract?