Location via proxy:   [ UP ]  
[Report a bug]   [Manage cookies]                
Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 2K views

    Gonzales Vs PNB

    Uploaded by

    nieville
    The petitioner bought one share of stock in the Philippine National Bank (PNB) in order to gain standing to inquire about and compel PNB to produce its books and records regarding alleged anomalies in the bank's extension of credit for public works projects. However, the court ruled that the petitioner did not have an absolute right to examine the records. It determined that the petitioner did not establish good faith or a legitimate purpose for the inspection. As a corporation created by a special charter, PNB is primarily governed by its own charter, which protects the confidentiality of its records, rather than the Corporation Code. Therefore, the petitioner could not compel PNB to produce its books and records.

    Copyright:

    Attribution Non-Commercial (BY-NC)
    Download as DOC, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Gonzales Vs PNB

    Uploaded by

    nieville
    2K views2 pages
    The petitioner bought one share of stock in the Philippine National Bank (PNB) in order to gain standing to inquire about and compel PNB to produce its books and records regarding alleged anomalies in the bank's extension of credit for public works projects. However, the court ruled that the petitioner did not have an absolute right to examine the records. It determined that the petitioner did not establish good faith or a legitimate purpose for the inspection. As a corporation created by a special charter, PNB is primarily governed by its own charter, which protects the confidentiality of its records, rather than the Corporation Code. Therefore, the petitioner could not compel PNB to produce its books and records.

    Original Title

    Gonzales vs PNB

    Copyright

    © Attribution Non-Commercial (BY-NC)

    Available Formats

    DOC, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    The petitioner bought one share of stock in the Philippine National Bank (PNB) in order to gain standing to inquire about and compel PNB to produce its books and records regarding alleged anomalies in the bank's extension of credit for public works projects. However, the court ruled that the petitioner did not have an absolute right to examine the records. It determined that the petitioner did not establish good faith or a legitimate purpose for the inspection. As a corporation created by a special charter, PNB is primarily governed by its own charter, which protects the confidentiality of its records, rather than the Corporation Code. Therefore, the petitioner could not compel PNB to produce its books and records.

    Copyright:

    Attribution Non-Commercial (BY-NC)
    Download as DOC, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as doc, pdf, or txt
    2K views2 pages

    Gonzales Vs PNB

    Uploaded by

    nieville
    The petitioner bought one share of stock in the Philippine National Bank (PNB) in order to gain standing to inquire about and compel PNB to produce its books and records regarding alleged anomalies in the bank's extension of credit for public works projects. However, the court ruled that the petitioner did not have an absolute right to examine the records. It determined that the petitioner did not establish good faith or a legitimate purpose for the inspection. As a corporation created by a special charter, PNB is primarily governed by its own charter, which protects the confidentiality of its records, rather than the Corporation Code. Therefore, the petitioner could not compel PNB to produce its books and records.

    Copyright:

    Attribution Non-Commercial (BY-NC)
    Download as DOC, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as doc, pdf, or txt
    of 2

    Gonzales vs PNB 122 SCRA 489 FACTS: Gonzales instituted a suit, as a taxpayer, against Sec.

    of Public Works and Communications, the Commissioner of Public Highways, and PNB for alleged anomalies committed regarding the banks extension of credit to import public works equipment intended for the massive development program. The petitioners standing was questioned because he did not owned any share in PNB. Consequently, Petitioner bought 1 share of PNB stocks in order to gain standing as a stockholder. Petitioner thereafter sought to inquire and ordered PNB to produce its books and records which the Bank refused, invoking the provisions from its charter created by Congress. The petitioner filed petition for mandamus to compel PNB to produce its books and records. The RTC dismissed the petition and it ruled that the right to examine and inspect corporate books is not absolute, but is limited to purposes reasonably related to the interest of the stockholder, must be asked for in good faith for a specific and honest purpose and not gratify curiosity or for speculative or vicious purposes; that such examination would violate the confidentiality of the records of the respondent bank as provided in Section 16 of its charter, Republic Act No. 1300, as amended; and that the petitioner has not exhausted his administrative remedies. ISSUE: Whether or not Petitioner may compel PNB to produce its books and records HELD: No. As may be noted from the Sec 74 BP Blg. 68, among the changes introduced in the new Code with respect to the right of inspection granted to a stockholder are the following the records must be kept at the principal office of the corporation; the inspection must be made on business days; the stockholder may demand a copy of the excerpts of the records or minutes; and the refusal to allow such inspection shall subject the erring officer or agent of the corporation to civil and criminal liabilities. However, while seemingly enlarging the right of inspection, the new Code has prescribed limitations to the same. It is now expressly required as a condition for such examination that the one requesting it must not have been guilty of using improperly any information through a prior examination, and that the person asking for such examination must be "acting in good faith and for a legitimate purpose in making his demand." Although the petitioner has claimed that he has justifiable motives in seeking the inspection of the books of the respondent bank, he has not set forth the reasons and the purposes for which he desires such inspection, except to satisfy himself as to the truth of published reports regarding certain transactions entered into by the respondent bank and to inquire into their validity. The circumstances under which he acquired one share of stock in the respondent bank purposely to exercise the right of inspection do not argue

    in favor of his good faith and proper motivation. Admittedly he sought to be a stockholder in order to pry into transactions entered into by the respondent bank even before he became a stockholder. His obvious purpose was to arm himself with materials which he can use against the respondent bank for acts done by the latter when the petitioner was a total stranger to the same. He could have been impelled by a laudable sense of civic consciousness, but it could not be said that his purpose is germane to his interest as a stockholder. The inspection sought to be exercised by the petitioner would be violative of the provisions of its charter of PNB. The Philippine National Bank is not an ordinary corporation. Having a charter of its own, it is not governed, as a rule, by the Corporation Code of the Philippines. Section 4 of the said Code provides: SEC. 4. Corporations created by special laws or charters. Corporations created by special laws or charters shall be governed primarily by the provisions of the special law or charter creating them or applicable to them. supplemented by the provisions of this Code, insofar as they are applicable. The provision of Section 74 of Batas Pambansa Blg. 68 of the new Corporation Code with respect to the right of a stockholder to demand an inspection or examination of the books of the corporation may not be reconciled with the abovequoted provisions of the charter of the respondent bank. It is not correct to claim, therefore, that the right of inspection under Section 74 of the new Corporation Code may apply in a supplementary capacity to the charter of the respondent bank.

    You might also like