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

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 133 views

    National Abaca and Other Fibers Corporation V

    Uploaded by

    cyhaaangelaaa
    This case involves a corporation, National Abaca and Other Fibers Corporation, suing a defendant in municipal court over an alleged failure to account for cash advances. The defendant argued the corporation no longer had legal capacity to sue as it had been abolished by executive order three years prior. The corporation argued it could still prosecute suits initiated within the three year winding up period. The Court of First Instance ordered the corporation to add the Board of Liquidators as a co-plaintiff. The corporation appealed. The Supreme Court ruled that under the Corporation Law, a corporation cannot continue an action in its own name after the three year period for winding up expires. The orders of the Court of First Instance were reversed and the amended complaint adding

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    National Abaca and Other Fibers Corporation V

    Uploaded by

    cyhaaangelaaa
    133 views1 page
    This case involves a corporation, National Abaca and Other Fibers Corporation, suing a defendant in municipal court over an alleged failure to account for cash advances. The defendant argued the corporation no longer had legal capacity to sue as it had been abolished by executive order three years prior. The corporation argued it could still prosecute suits initiated within the three year winding up period. The Court of First Instance ordered the corporation to add the Board of Liquidators as a co-plaintiff. The corporation appealed. The Supreme Court ruled that under the Corporation Law, a corporation cannot continue an action in its own name after the three year period for winding up expires. The orders of the Court of First Instance were reversed and the amended complaint adding

    Original Description:

    digest

    Copyright

    © © All Rights Reserved

    Available Formats

    DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    This case involves a corporation, National Abaca and Other Fibers Corporation, suing a defendant in municipal court over an alleged failure to account for cash advances. The defendant argued the corporation no longer had legal capacity to sue as it had been abolished by executive order three years prior. The corporation argued it could still prosecute suits initiated within the three year winding up period. The Court of First Instance ordered the corporation to add the Board of Liquidators as a co-plaintiff. The corporation appealed. The Supreme Court ruled that under the Corporation Law, a corporation cannot continue an action in its own name after the three year period for winding up expires. The orders of the Court of First Instance were reversed and the amended complaint adding

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as docx, pdf, or txt
    133 views1 page

    National Abaca and Other Fibers Corporation V

    Uploaded by

    cyhaaangelaaa
    This case involves a corporation, National Abaca and Other Fibers Corporation, suing a defendant in municipal court over an alleged failure to account for cash advances. The defendant argued the corporation no longer had legal capacity to sue as it had been abolished by executive order three years prior. The corporation argued it could still prosecute suits initiated within the three year winding up period. The Court of First Instance ordered the corporation to add the Board of Liquidators as a co-plaintiff. The corporation appealed. The Supreme Court ruled that under the Corporation Law, a corporation cannot continue an action in its own name after the three year period for winding up expires. The orders of the Court of First Instance were reversed and the amended complaint adding

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as docx, pdf, or txt
    of 1

    NATIONAL ABACA AND OTHER FIBERS CORPORATION V. PORE (G.R. NO.

    L-16779)

    Facts:
    Plaintiff filed with the Municipal Court of Tacloban, Leyte, a complaint, against defendant for
    the recovery of the amount allegedly advanced to her for the purchase of hemp for the account of
    the former and for which she had allegedly failed to account. In her answer, defendant alleged that
    she had accounted for all cash advances received by her for the aforementioned purpose from the
    plaintiff. In due course, said court rendering judgment finding that the defendant had not accounted
    for cash advances, she was accordingly, sentenced to pay to the plaintiff with legal interest in
    addition to the costs.
    Said court having subsequently denied a reconsideration of this decision, as well a new trial
    prayed for the plaintiff, the latter appealed to the Court of First Instance of Leyte, in which defendant
    moved to dismiss the complaint upon the ground that plaintiff has no legal capacity to sue, it having
    abolished by Executive Order No. 372 of the President of the Philippines, dated November 24, 1950.
    Plaintiff objected thereto upon the ground that pursuant to said executive order, plaintiff shall
    nevertheless be continued as a body corporate for a period of three (3) years from the effective date
    of said executive order, which was November 30, 1950, for the purpose of prosecuting and
    defending suits by or against it and of enabling the Board of Liquidators thereby created
    gradually to settle and close its affairs, . . . and that this case was begun on November 14, 1953, or
    before the expiration of the period aforementioned. After due hearing, the court of first instance
    issued an order directing plaintiff to amend the complaint, within ten (10) days from notice, by
    including the Board of Liquidators as co-party plaintiff, with the admonition that otherwise the case
    would be dismissed. Hence, an appeal by plaintiff National Abaca and other Fibers Corporation, from
    two (2) orders of the Court of First Instance of Leyte.

    Issue:
    Whether an action, commenced within three (3) years after the abolition of plaintiff, as a
    corporation, may be continued by the same after the expiration of said period.

    Ruling:
    The rule appears to be well settled that, in the absence of statutory provision to the contrary,
    pending actions by or against a corporation are abated upon expiration of the period allowed by law
    for the liquidation of its affairs.
    Our Corporation Law contains no provision authorizing a corporation, after three (3) years
    from the expiration of its lifetime, to continue in its corporate name actions instituted by it within said
    period of three (3) years. in fact, section 77 of said law provides that the corporation shall be
    continued as a body corporate for three (3) years after the time when it would have been . . .
    dissolved, for the purposed of prosecuting and defending suits by or against it . . ., so that,
    thereafter, it shall no longer enjoy corporate existence for such purpose. For this reason, section 78
    of the same law authorizes the corporation, at any time during said three years . . . to convey all of
    its property to trustees for the benefit of members, stockholders, creditors and other interested,
    evidently for the purpose, among others, of enabling said trustees to prosecute and defend suits by
    or against the corporation begun before the expiration of said period.
    Obviously, the complete loss of plaintiffs corporate existence after the expiration of the
    period of three (3) years for the settlement of its affairs is what impelled the President to create a
    Board of Liquidators, to continue the management of such matters as may then be pending. The first
    question must, therefore, be answered in the negative.
    Wherefore, the orders appealed from are reversed, plaintiffs amended complaint is hereby
    admitted, and the record remanded to the lower court for further proceedings.

    You might also like