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

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 683 views

    Koruga Vs Arcenas

    Uploaded by

    cyhaaangelaaa
    The Supreme Court ruled that the jurisdiction over Koruga's complaint against Banco Filipino Savings and Mortgage Bank lies with the Bangko Sentral ng Pilipinas (BSP) Monetary Board, not the Regional Trial Court (RTC). The New Central Bank Act specifically regulates banks and financial institutions, including provisions for the appointment of conservators and receivers, which shall take precedence over the general Corporation Code. Section 30 of the New Central Bank Act vests the designation of conservators and appointment of receivers exclusively with the Monetary Board. Therefore, the RTC has no jurisdiction over a case seeking receivership of a bank such as Koruga's complaint against Banco Filipino, and the jurisdiction rightfully lies with the Monetary

    Copyright:

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

    Koruga Vs Arcenas

    Uploaded by

    cyhaaangelaaa
    683 views2 pages
    The Supreme Court ruled that the jurisdiction over Koruga's complaint against Banco Filipino Savings and Mortgage Bank lies with the Bangko Sentral ng Pilipinas (BSP) Monetary Board, not the Regional Trial Court (RTC). The New Central Bank Act specifically regulates banks and financial institutions, including provisions for the appointment of conservators and receivers, which shall take precedence over the general Corporation Code. Section 30 of the New Central Bank Act vests the designation of conservators and appointment of receivers exclusively with the Monetary Board. Therefore, the RTC has no jurisdiction over a case seeking receivership of a bank such as Koruga's complaint against Banco Filipino, and the jurisdiction rightfully lies with the Monetary

    Original Description:

    bank

    Original Title

    Koruga vs Arcenas

    Copyright

    © © All Rights Reserved

    Available Formats

    DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    The Supreme Court ruled that the jurisdiction over Koruga's complaint against Banco Filipino Savings and Mortgage Bank lies with the Bangko Sentral ng Pilipinas (BSP) Monetary Board, not the Regional Trial Court (RTC). The New Central Bank Act specifically regulates banks and financial institutions, including provisions for the appointment of conservators and receivers, which shall take precedence over the general Corporation Code. Section 30 of the New Central Bank Act vests the designation of conservators and appointment of receivers exclusively with the Monetary Board. Therefore, the RTC has no jurisdiction over a case seeking receivership of a bank such as Koruga's complaint against Banco Filipino, and the jurisdiction rightfully lies with the Monetary

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as docx, pdf, or txt
    683 views2 pages

    Koruga Vs Arcenas

    Uploaded by

    cyhaaangelaaa
    The Supreme Court ruled that the jurisdiction over Koruga's complaint against Banco Filipino Savings and Mortgage Bank lies with the Bangko Sentral ng Pilipinas (BSP) Monetary Board, not the Regional Trial Court (RTC). The New Central Bank Act specifically regulates banks and financial institutions, including provisions for the appointment of conservators and receivers, which shall take precedence over the general Corporation Code. Section 30 of the New Central Bank Act vests the designation of conservators and appointment of receivers exclusively with the Monetary Board. Therefore, the RTC has no jurisdiction over a case seeking receivership of a bank such as Koruga's complaint against Banco Filipino, and the jurisdiction rightfully lies with the Monetary

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as docx, pdf, or txt
    You are on page 1of 2

    Koruga vs. Arcenas, Jr.

    G.R. No. 168332 Korugas invocation of the provisions of the Corporation Code
    June 19, 2009 is misplaced. In an earlier case with similar antecedents, we ruled
    FACTS: that:

    The Corporation Code, however, is a general law


    1. Koruga is a minority stockholder of Banco Filipino Savings
    applying to all types of corporations, while the New
    and Mortgage Bank. Central Bank Act regulates specifically banks and
    other financial institutions, including the dissolution
    2. She filed a complaint before the RTC against the Board of and liquidation thereof. As between a general and
    Directors of Banco Filipino and the Members of the Monetary special law, the latter shall prevail generalia
    specialibus non derogant.[31]
    Board of the Bangko Sentral ng Pilipinas (BSP) for
     violation of the Corporation Code,
     for inspection of records of a corporation by a stockholder, Consequently, it is not the Interim Rules of Procedure on Intra-

     for receivership, and for the creation of a management Corporate Controversies,[32] or Rule 59 of the Rules of Civil Procedure

    committee on Receivership, that would apply to this case. Instead, Sections 29


    3. Arcenas, et al. filed their Answer raising, among others, the and 30 of the New Central Bank Act should be followed, viz.:
    trial courts lack of jurisdiction to take cognizance of the
    case. They also filed a Manifestation and Motion seeking the
    dismissal of the case Section 29. Appointment of Conservator. -
    4. RTC: denied the Manifestation and Motion Whenever, on the basis of a report submitted by the
    5. CA: Ruled that the RTC did not commit grave abuse of appropriate supervising or examining department, the
    discretion and ordered the RTC to proceed with the trial of the Monetary Board finds that a bank or a quasi-bank is
    case in a state of continuing inability or unwillingness to
    6. Arcenas, et al filed a petition before the SC alleging, among maintain a condition of liquidity deemed adequate to
    others, that the jurisdiction over the subject matter of the case protect the interest of depositors and creditors, the
    is vested by the law in the BSP Monetary Board may appoint a conservator with such
    powers as the Monetary Board shall deem necessary
    to take charge of the assets, liabilities, and the
    ISSUE: management thereof, reorganize the management,
    Which body has jurisdiction over the Koruga Complaint, the collect all monies and debts due said institution, and
    RTC or the BSP? exercise all powers necessary to restore its viability.
    The conservator shall report and be responsible to the
    Monetary Board and shall have the power to overrule
    RULING: or revoke the actions of the previous management
    and board of directors of the bank or quasi-bank.
    Section 30. Proceedings in Receivership
    and Liquidation. –

    xxxx

    The designation of a conservator under


    Section 29 of this Act or the appointment of a
    receiver under this section shall be vested
    exclusively with the Monetary Board. Furthermore,
    the designation of a conservator is not a precondition
    to the designation of a receiver.[33]

    On the strength of these provisions, it is the Monetary Board


    that exercises exclusive jurisdiction over proceedings for receivership
    of banks.

    Crystal clear in Section 30 is the provision that says the


    appointment of a receiver under this section shall be vested
    exclusively with the Monetary Board. The term exclusively connotes
    that only the Monetary Board can resolve the issue of whether a bank
    is to be placed under receivership and, upon an affirmative finding, it
    also has authority to appoint a receiver. This is further affirmed by the
    fact that the law allows the Monetary Board to take action summarily
    and without need for prior hearing.

    From the foregoing disquisition, there is no doubt that the RTC has
    no jurisdiction to hear and decide a suit that seeks to place Banco
    Filipino under receivership.

    You might also like