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

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 321 views

    Armco Vs Sec

    Uploaded by

    Stewart Paul Torre
    This document summarizes a conflict of laws case between ARMCO Steel Corp. (ARMCO-Ohio), ARMCO Marsteel-Alloy Corporation (ARMCO-Marsteel) and ARMCO Steel Corporation (ARMCO-Philippines). ARMCO-Ohio and ARMCO-Marsteel filed a petition to compel ARMCO-Philippines to change its similar corporate name. The SEC granted the petition but ARMCO-Philippines only changed its name to "ARMCO structures, Inc.", still retaining the ARMCO name. The Supreme Court ruled that ARMCO-Philippines did not substantially comply with the SEC order in good faith as it failed to remove "ARMCO" from its name despite being ordered to

    Copyright:

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

    Armco Vs Sec

    Uploaded by

    Stewart Paul Torre
    321 views9 pages
    This document summarizes a conflict of laws case between ARMCO Steel Corp. (ARMCO-Ohio), ARMCO Marsteel-Alloy Corporation (ARMCO-Marsteel) and ARMCO Steel Corporation (ARMCO-Philippines). ARMCO-Ohio and ARMCO-Marsteel filed a petition to compel ARMCO-Philippines to change its similar corporate name. The SEC granted the petition but ARMCO-Philippines only changed its name to "ARMCO structures, Inc.", still retaining the ARMCO name. The Supreme Court ruled that ARMCO-Philippines did not substantially comply with the SEC order in good faith as it failed to remove "ARMCO" from its name despite being ordered to

    Original Description:

    law school presentation

    Original Title

    Armco vs Sec

    Copyright

    © © All Rights Reserved

    Available Formats

    PPT, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    This document summarizes a conflict of laws case between ARMCO Steel Corp. (ARMCO-Ohio), ARMCO Marsteel-Alloy Corporation (ARMCO-Marsteel) and ARMCO Steel Corporation (ARMCO-Philippines). ARMCO-Ohio and ARMCO-Marsteel filed a petition to compel ARMCO-Philippines to change its similar corporate name. The SEC granted the petition but ARMCO-Philippines only changed its name to "ARMCO structures, Inc.", still retaining the ARMCO name. The Supreme Court ruled that ARMCO-Philippines did not substantially comply with the SEC order in good faith as it failed to remove "ARMCO" from its name despite being ordered to

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as PPT, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as ppt, pdf, or txt
    321 views9 pages

    Armco Vs Sec

    Uploaded by

    Stewart Paul Torre
    This document summarizes a conflict of laws case between ARMCO Steel Corp. (ARMCO-Ohio), ARMCO Marsteel-Alloy Corporation (ARMCO-Marsteel) and ARMCO Steel Corporation (ARMCO-Philippines). ARMCO-Ohio and ARMCO-Marsteel filed a petition to compel ARMCO-Philippines to change its similar corporate name. The SEC granted the petition but ARMCO-Philippines only changed its name to "ARMCO structures, Inc.", still retaining the ARMCO name. The Supreme Court ruled that ARMCO-Philippines did not substantially comply with the SEC order in good faith as it failed to remove "ARMCO" from its name despite being ordered to

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as PPT, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as ppt, pdf, or txt
    of 9

    STEWART PAUL TORRE, Ll.B.

    II-B
    CONFLICT OF LAWS

    FACTS OF THE CASE

    ARMCO Steel Corp. is a corporation organized in


    Ohio, USA, hereinafter called ARMCO-OHIO.

    ARMCO Marsteel-Alloy Corporation was


    incorporated in the Philippines under its original
    name Marsteel Alloy Company, Inc. but its name
    was changed to ARMCO-Marsteel Alloy Corporation
    hereinafter called ARMCO-Marsteel, by amendment
    of its Articles of Incorporation after the ARMCOOhio purchased 40% of its capital stock.

    STEWART PAUL TORRE, Ll.B. II-B


    CONFLICT OF LAWS

    FACTS OF THE CASE

    Both said corporations are engaged in the


    manufacture of steel products.

    On the other hand, ARMCO Steel Corporation


    was incorporated in the Philippines,
    hereinafter called ARMCO-Philippines. A
    pertinent portion of its articles of
    incorporation provides as among its purposes:
    "to contract, fabricate ... manufacture ...
    regarding pipelines, steel frames ....

    STEWART PAUL TORRE, Ll.B. II-B


    CONFLICT OF LAWS

    FACTS OF THE CASE

    ARMCO-Ohio and ARMCO-Marsteel then filed a


    petition in the SEC to compel ARMCO-Philippines
    to change its corporate name on the ground that
    it is very similar, if not exactly the same as the
    name of one of the petitioners. SEC granted the
    petition.

    Respondent amended its articles of incorporation


    by changing its name to "ARMCO structures, Inc."
    which was filed with and approved by the SEC.

    STEWART PAUL TORRE, Ll.B. II-B


    CONFLICT OF LAWS

    FACTS OF THE CASE

    Petitioners filed a comment alleging that the


    change of name of said respondent was not
    done in good faith and is not in accordance
    with the order of the Commission which was
    to take out ARMCO and substitute another
    word in lieu thereof in its corporate name by
    amending the articles of incorporation.

    STEWART PAUL TORRE, Ll.B. II-B


    CONFLICT OF LAWS

    ISSUE

    WHETHER OR NOT ARMCO-Philippines had


    substantially complied in good faith with said
    order and said compliance had achieved the
    purpose of the order, by changing its
    corporate name with the approval of SEC

    STEWART PAUL TORRE, Ll.B. II-B


    CONFLICT OF LAWS

    Supreme Courts
    RULING

    NO. The said amendment in the corporate name of


    petitioner is not in substantial compliance with the
    order. To repeat, the order was for the removal of
    the word "ARMCO" from the corporate name of the
    petitioner which it failed to do.

    And even if this change of corporate name was


    erroneously accepted and approved in the SEC it
    cannot thereby legalize nor change what is clearly
    unauthorized if not contemptuous act of petitioner
    in securing the registration of a new corporate
    name against the very previous order of the SEC.

    STEWART PAUL TORRE, Ll.B. II-B


    CONFLICT OF LAWS

    Supreme Courts
    RULING

    Certainly the said previous order is not rendered


    functus oficio thereby. Had petitioner revealed at
    the time of the registration of its amended
    corporate name that there was the said order, the
    registration of the amended corporate name could
    not have been accepted and approved by the
    persons in-charge of the registration.

    The actuations in this respect of petitioner are far


    from regular much less in good faith. Noted in fact,
    ARMCO STEEL-PHILIPPINES has not only an
    identical name but also a similar line of business.

    STEWART PAUL TORRE, Ll.B. II-B


    CONFLICT OF LAWS

    Supreme Courts
    RULING

    People who are buying and using products


    bearing the trademark "Armco" might be led to
    believe that such products are manufactured
    by the respondent, when in fact; they might
    actually be produced by the petitioners.

    Thus, the good will that should grow and inure


    to the benefit of petitioners could be impaired
    and prejudiced by the continued use of the
    same term by the respondent

    STEWART PAUL TORRE, Ll.B. II-B


    CONFLICT OF LAWS

    You might also like