Professional Documents
Culture Documents
SUPREMECOURTREPORTSANNOTATEDVOLUME652
691
691
http://www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/0000014e4a3d8e4fcfd5bc9e000a0094004f00ee/p/AMN451/?username=Guest
1/99
7/1/2015
SUPREMECOURTREPORTSANNOTATEDVOLUME652
692
http://www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/0000014e4a3d8e4fcfd5bc9e000a0094004f00ee/p/AMN451/?username=Guest
2/99
7/1/2015
SUPREMECOURTREPORTSANNOTATEDVOLUME652
693
http://www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/0000014e4a3d8e4fcfd5bc9e000a0094004f00ee/p/AMN451/?username=Guest
3/99
7/1/2015
SUPREMECOURTREPORTSANNOTATEDVOLUME652
694
the avails of the suit. Petitioner has failed to allege any interest
http://www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/0000014e4a3d8e4fcfd5bc9e000a0094004f00ee/p/AMN451/?username=Guest
4/99
7/1/2015
SUPREMECOURTREPORTSANNOTATEDVOLUME652
695
5/99
7/1/2015
SUPREMECOURTREPORTSANNOTATEDVOLUME652
interests are adverse (2) the party seeking the relief has a legal
interest in the controversy and (3) the issue is ripe for judicial
determination. As previously discussed, petitioner lacks any real
interest in this action thus, no justiciable controversy between
adverse interests exists.
Same Same Same The exercise of such discretion, whether to
treat a petition for declaratory relief as one for mandamus,
presupposes that the petition is otherwise viable or meritorious.
Despite this, the ponencia decided to treat the petition for
declaratory relief as one for mandamus, citing the rule that
where the petition has farreaching implications and raises
questions that should be resolved, it may be treated as one for
mandamus. However, such rule is not absolute. In Macasiano v.
National Housing Authority, 224 SCRA 236 (1993), the Court
explicitly stated that the exercise of such discretion, whether to
treat a petition for declaratory relief as one for mandamus,
presupposes that the petition is otherwise viable or
meritorious. As I shall discuss subsequently in the substantive
portion of this opinion, the petition in this case is clearly not
viable or meritorious.
Same Mandamus A petition for mandamus is premature if
there are administrative remedies available to petitioner.A
petition for mandamus is premature if there are administrative
remedies available to petitioner. Under the doctrine of primary
administrative jurisdiction, courts cannot or will not determine a
controversy where the issues for resolution demand the exercise of
sound administrative discretion requiring the special knowledge,
experience, and services of the administrative tribunal to
determine technical and intricate matters of fact. In other words,
if a case is such that its determination requires the expertise,
specialized training and knowledge of an administrative body,
relief must first be obtained in an administrative proceeding
before resort to the courts is had even if the matter may well be
within their proper jurisdiction. Along with this, the doctrine of
exhaustion of administrative remedies also requires that where
an administrative remedy is provided by statute relief must be
sought by exhausting this remedy before the courts will act.
696
696
6/99
7/1/2015
SUPREMECOURTREPORTSANNOTATEDVOLUME652
697
7/99
7/1/2015
SUPREMECOURTREPORTSANNOTATEDVOLUME652
698
8/99
7/1/2015
SUPREMECOURTREPORTSANNOTATEDVOLUME652
699
9/99
7/1/2015
SUPREMECOURTREPORTSANNOTATEDVOLUME652
700
10/99
7/1/2015
SUPREMECOURTREPORTSANNOTATEDVOLUME652
701
11/99
7/1/2015
SUPREMECOURTREPORTSANNOTATEDVOLUME652
xxxx
Section
11.No
franchise,
certificate,
or
any
other
form
of
702
12/99
7/1/2015
SUPREMECOURTREPORTSANNOTATEDVOLUME652
703
13/99
7/1/2015
SUPREMECOURTREPORTSANNOTATEDVOLUME652
Petitioner asserts:
If and when the sale is completed, First Pacifics equity in PLDT
will go up from 30.7 percent to 37.0 percent of its commonor vot
_______________
5Rollo, (Vol. II), p. 806.
6Rollo (Vol. I), p. 23.
704
704
http://www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/0000014e4a3d8e4fcfd5bc9e000a0094004f00ee/p/AMN451/?username=Guest
14/99
7/1/2015
SUPREMECOURTREPORTSANNOTATEDVOLUME652
_______________
7Id., at pp. 2324, 26.
8Id., at p. 41.
705
705
15/99
7/1/2015
SUPREMECOURTREPORTSANNOTATEDVOLUME652
706
707
16/99
7/1/2015
SUPREMECOURTREPORTSANNOTATEDVOLUME652
708
17/99
7/1/2015
SUPREMECOURTREPORTSANNOTATEDVOLUME652
709
18/99
7/1/2015
SUPREMECOURTREPORTSANNOTATEDVOLUME652
710
19/99
7/1/2015
SUPREMECOURTREPORTSANNOTATEDVOLUME652
agreements
with
Filipino
citizens,
or
corporations or associations
711
711
20/99
7/1/2015
SUPREMECOURTREPORTSANNOTATEDVOLUME652
712
21/99
7/1/2015
SUPREMECOURTREPORTSANNOTATEDVOLUME652
Educational institutions,
other
than
those
established
by
Congress
may,
however,
require
increased
Filipino
equity
713
22/99
7/1/2015
SUPREMECOURTREPORTSANNOTATEDVOLUME652
714
23/99
7/1/2015
SUPREMECOURTREPORTSANNOTATEDVOLUME652
715
24/99
7/1/2015
SUPREMECOURTREPORTSANNOTATEDVOLUME652
716
OF THE
REPUBLIC
OF THE
PHILIPPINES, p. 452,
citing Smith, Bell and Co. v. Natividad, 40 Phil. 136, 148 (1919) Luzon
Stevedoring Corporation v. AntiDummy Board, 46 SCRA 474, 490 (1972).
26Id.
27 DE LEON, HECTOR, PHILIPPINE CONSTITUTIONAL LAW (PRINCIPLES
AND
LEON,
HECTOR,
PHILIPPINE
http://www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/0000014e4a3d8e4fcfd5bc9e000a0094004f00ee/p/AMN451/?username=Guest
25/99
7/1/2015
SUPREMECOURTREPORTSANNOTATEDVOLUME652
717
KNOWN
AND
AS
ALL
THE
PUBLIC
INCONSISTENT
SERVICE
ACT,
LEGISLATIVE
AS
AND
26/99
7/1/2015
SUPREMECOURTREPORTSANNOTATEDVOLUME652
718
Petitionersinintervention
basically
reiterate
petitioners arguments and adopt petitioners definition of
the term capital.33Petitionersinintervention allege that
the approximate foreign ownership of common capital
stock of PLDT x x x already amounts to at least 63.54% of
the total outstanding common stock, which means that
foreigners exercise significant control over PLDT, patently
violating the 40 percent foreign equity limitation in public
utilities prescribed by the Constitution.
Respondents, on the other hand, do not offer any
definition of the term capital in Section 11, Article XII of
the Constitution. More importantly, private respondents
Nazareno and Pangilinan of PLDT do not dispute that
more than 40 percent of the common shares of PLDT are
held by foreigners.
In particular, respondent Nazarenos Memorandum,
consisting of 73 pages, harps mainly on the procedural
infirmities of the petition and the supposed violation of the
due process rights of the affected foreign common
shareholders. Respondent Nazareno does not deny
petitioners allegation of foreigners dominating the
common shareholdings of PLDT. Nazareno stressed mainly
that the petition seeks to divest foreign common
shareholders purportedly exceeding 40% of the total
common shareholdings in PLDT of their ownership
over their shares. Thus, the foreign natural and
juridical PLDT shareholders must be impleaded in this suit
so that they can be heard.34 Essentially, Nazareno invokes
denial of due process on behalf of the foreign common
shareholders.
While Nazareno does not introduce any definition of the
term capital, he states that among the factual asser
_______________
See also Philippine Consumers Foundation, Inc. v. NTC and PLDT, G.R.
No. L63318, 18 April 1984, 131 SCRA 200, on the origin and rationale of
the SIP.
33Rollo (Vol. I), pp. 414451.
34Rollo (Vol. II), p. 991.
719
719
http://www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/0000014e4a3d8e4fcfd5bc9e000a0094004f00ee/p/AMN451/?username=Guest
27/99
7/1/2015
SUPREMECOURTREPORTSANNOTATEDVOLUME652
720
28/99
7/1/2015
SUPREMECOURTREPORTSANNOTATEDVOLUME652
721
29/99
7/1/2015
SUPREMECOURTREPORTSANNOTATEDVOLUME652
722
30/99
7/1/2015
SUPREMECOURTREPORTSANNOTATEDVOLUME652
723
31/99
7/1/2015
SUPREMECOURTREPORTSANNOTATEDVOLUME652
of
shares.The
shares
of
stock
of
stock
724
32/99
7/1/2015
SUPREMECOURTREPORTSANNOTATEDVOLUME652
be issued only with a stated par value. The Board of Directors, where
authorized in the articles of incorporation, may fix the terms and
conditions of preferred shares of stock or any series thereof: Provided,
That such terms and conditions shall be effective upon the filing of a
certificate thereof with the Securities and Exchange Commission.
Shares of capital stock issued without par value shall be deemed fully
paid and nonassessable and the holder of such shares shall not be liable
to the corporation or to its creditors in respect thereto: Provided, That
shares without par value may not be issued for a consideration less than
the value of five (P5.00) pesos per share: Provided, further, That the
entire consideration received by the corporation for its nopar value
shares shall be treated as capital and shall not be available for
distribution as dividends.
A corporation may, furthermore, classify its shares for the purpose of
insuring compliance with constitutional or legal requirements.
Except as otherwise provided in the articles of incorporation and stated
in the certificate of stock, each share shall be equal in all respects to
every other share.
725
725
33/99
7/1/2015
SUPREMECOURTREPORTSANNOTATEDVOLUME652
726
34/99
7/1/2015
SUPREMECOURTREPORTSANNOTATEDVOLUME652
_______________
46Section 6, BP Blg. 68 or The Corporation Code.
47 Agpalo, Ruben E., Comments on the Corporation Code of the Philippines,
2001 Second Edition, p. 36.
727
727
728
http://www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/0000014e4a3d8e4fcfd5bc9e000a0094004f00ee/p/AMN451/?username=Guest
35/99
7/1/2015
SUPREMECOURTREPORTSANNOTATEDVOLUME652
PRESCRIBE
THE
PROCEDURES
FOR
REGISTERING
729
36/99
7/1/2015
SUPREMECOURTREPORTSANNOTATEDVOLUME652
730
37/99
7/1/2015
SUPREMECOURTREPORTSANNOTATEDVOLUME652
731
38/99
7/1/2015
SUPREMECOURTREPORTSANNOTATEDVOLUME652
732
39/99
7/1/2015
SUPREMECOURTREPORTSANNOTATEDVOLUME652
733
40/99
7/1/2015
SUPREMECOURTREPORTSANNOTATEDVOLUME652
734
41/99
7/1/2015
SUPREMECOURTREPORTSANNOTATEDVOLUME652
735
42/99
7/1/2015
SUPREMECOURTREPORTSANNOTATEDVOLUME652
%207.2.10%29_final.pdf
55http://www.sec.gov.ph/index.htm?GIS_Download
56http://www.pldt.com.ph/investor/shareholder/Documents/GIS_2010_%28as%20of
%207.2.10%29_final.pdf
57http://www.pldt.com.ph/investor/Documents/2009%20Dividend%20Declarations_Update
%2012082009.pdf.
See
also
http://www.pldt.com.ph/investor/Documents/disclosures_0301 2011.pdf
58Subscription Investment Plan. See PD No. 217.
59 This is the result of the preferred shares being denominated 10%
preferred, which means each preferred share will earn an annual dividend
equal to 10% of its par value of P10, which amounts to P1. Once this
dividend is paid to holders of preferred shares, the rest
736
736
shares.
See
http://www.pldt.com.ph/investor/Documents/2009%20Dividend%20Declarations_Update
%2012082009.pdf
In 2011, PLDT declared dividends for the common shares at P78.00 per
share.
(http://www.pldt.com.ph/investor/Documents/disclosures_0301
2011.pdf)
60http://www.pldt.com.ph/investor/shareholder/Documents/GIS_2010_(as%20of
%207.2.10)_final.pdf
61Id. Based on PLDTs 2010 GIS, the paidup capital of PLDT (as of
Record Date 12 April 2010) consists of the following:
http://www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/0000014e4a3d8e4fcfd5bc9e000a0094004f00ee/p/AMN451/?username=Guest
43/99
7/1/2015
SUPREMECOURTREPORTSANNOTATEDVOLUME652
See
http://www.pldt.com.ph/investor/shareholder/Documents/GIS_2010_%28as%20of%207.2.10%29_final.pdf
(accessed 23 May 2011).
Authorized capital stock of PLDT is broken down as follows:
Common shares: 234,000,000
Preferred shares: 822,500,000
Total: 1,056,000,000
737
737
44/99
7/1/2015
SUPREMECOURTREPORTSANNOTATEDVOLUME652
738
http://www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/0000014e4a3d8e4fcfd5bc9e000a0094004f00ee/p/AMN451/?username=Guest
45/99
7/1/2015
SUPREMECOURTREPORTSANNOTATEDVOLUME652
http://www.pse.com.ph/html/Quotations/2011/stockQuotes
739
46/99
7/1/2015
SUPREMECOURTREPORTSANNOTATEDVOLUME652
740
741
47/99
7/1/2015
SUPREMECOURTREPORTSANNOTATEDVOLUME652
Securities
and
Exchange
Commission
(SEC)
has
both
742
742
48/99
7/1/2015
SUPREMECOURTREPORTSANNOTATEDVOLUME652
be
rejected
or
disapproved.The
Securities
and
Exchange
743
49/99
7/1/2015
SUPREMECOURTREPORTSANNOTATEDVOLUME652
jurisdiction
and
supervision
over
all
corporations,
744
50/99
7/1/2015
SUPREMECOURTREPORTSANNOTATEDVOLUME652
745
51/99
7/1/2015
SUPREMECOURTREPORTSANNOTATEDVOLUME652
746
52/99
7/1/2015
SUPREMECOURTREPORTSANNOTATEDVOLUME652
747
http://www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/0000014e4a3d8e4fcfd5bc9e000a0094004f00ee/p/AMN451/?username=Guest
53/99
7/1/2015
SUPREMECOURTREPORTSANNOTATEDVOLUME652
_______________
10 Id., at pp. 902903.
11 Id., at p. 902.
12 Id., at p. 17.
13 Id., at p. 903.
14 Id., at p. 41.
748
748
54/99
7/1/2015
SUPREMECOURTREPORTSANNOTATEDVOLUME652
15 Id., at p. 15.
16 Rule 3, Sec. 2.
749
749
750
http://www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/0000014e4a3d8e4fcfd5bc9e000a0094004f00ee/p/AMN451/?username=Guest
55/99
7/1/2015
SUPREMECOURTREPORTSANNOTATEDVOLUME652
751
http://www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/0000014e4a3d8e4fcfd5bc9e000a0094004f00ee/p/AMN451/?username=Guest
56/99
7/1/2015
SUPREMECOURTREPORTSANNOTATEDVOLUME652
752
57/99
7/1/2015
SUPREMECOURTREPORTSANNOTATEDVOLUME652
753
58/99
7/1/2015
SUPREMECOURTREPORTSANNOTATEDVOLUME652
Have
jurisdiction
and
supervision
over
all
corporations,
754
59/99
7/1/2015
SUPREMECOURTREPORTSANNOTATEDVOLUME652
Lastly, although this Court, the CA, and the RTC have
concurrent jurisdiction to issue writs of certiorari,
prohibition, mandamus, quo warranto, habeas corpus and
injunction, such concurrence does not give the petitioner
unrestricted freedom of choice of court forum.32The
doctrine of
_______________
(m) Suspend, or revoke, after proper notice and hearing the franchise
or certificate of registration of corporations, partnership or associations,
upon any of the grounds provided by law and
(n) Exercise such other powers as may be provided by law as well as
those which may be implied from, or which are necessary or incidental to
the carrying out of, the express powers granted the Commission to achieve
the objectives and purposes of these laws.
29 National Power Corporation v. Province of Quezon and Municipality
of Pagbilao, G.R. No. 171586, January 25, 2010, 611 SCRA 71.
30 See Heirs of Juanita Padilla v. Magdua, G.R. No. 176858,
September 15, 2010, 630 SCRA 573, 586.
31 Batas Pambansa Blg. 129, Sec. 19. Jurisdiction in civil cases.
Regional Trial Courts shall exercise exclusive original jurisdiction:
(1)In all civil actions in which the subject of the litigation is incapable
of pecuniary estimation
xxxx
32 Chong v. Dela Cruz, G.R. No. 184948, July 21, 2009, 593 SCRA 311,
314 citing Talento v. Escalada, G.R. No. 180884, June 27, 2008, 556
SCRA 491.
755
755
60/99
7/1/2015
SUPREMECOURTREPORTSANNOTATEDVOLUME652
imposition upon the precious time of this Court but also because
of the inevitable and resultant delay, intended or otherwise, in
the adjudication of the case which often has to be remanded or
referred to the lower court as the proper forum under the rules of
procedure, or as better equipped to resolve the issues since this
Court is not a trier of facts. We, therefore, reiterate the judicial
policy that this Court will not entertain direct resort to it unless
the redress desired cannot be obtained in the appropriate courts
or where exceptional and compelling circumstances justify
availment of a remedy within and calling for the exercise of our
primary jurisdiction.
756
61/99
7/1/2015
SUPREMECOURTREPORTSANNOTATEDVOLUME652
757
62/99
7/1/2015
SUPREMECOURTREPORTSANNOTATEDVOLUME652
J.G.
Bernas,
S.J.,
THE
1987
PHILIPPINE
CONSTITUTION:
758
63/99
7/1/2015
SUPREMECOURTREPORTSANNOTATEDVOLUME652
759
64/99
7/1/2015
SUPREMECOURTREPORTSANNOTATEDVOLUME652
760
65/99
7/1/2015
SUPREMECOURTREPORTSANNOTATEDVOLUME652
_______________
47 G.R. No. 84404, October 18, 1990, 190 SCRA 717, 729.
761
761
66/99
7/1/2015
SUPREMECOURTREPORTSANNOTATEDVOLUME652
762
763
67/99
7/1/2015
SUPREMECOURTREPORTSANNOTATEDVOLUME652
764
68/99
7/1/2015
SUPREMECOURTREPORTSANNOTATEDVOLUME652
765
69/99
7/1/2015
SUPREMECOURTREPORTSANNOTATEDVOLUME652
766
70/99
7/1/2015
SUPREMECOURTREPORTSANNOTATEDVOLUME652
767
71/99
7/1/2015
SUPREMECOURTREPORTSANNOTATEDVOLUME652
supervision of the State. The State may directly undertake such activities,
or it may enter into coproduction, joint venture, or productionsharing
agreements with Filipino citizens, or corporations or associations at
least sixty per centum of whose capital is owned by such citizens.
x x x x (Emphasis supplied.)
57 Section 10, Article XII, 1987 Constitution:
Section 10.The Congress shall, upon recommendation of the
economic and planning agency, when the national interest dictates,
reserve to citizens of the Philippines or to corporations or associations
at least sixty per centum of whose capital is owned by such
citizens, or such higher percentage as Congress may prescribe, certain
areas of investments. The Congress shall enact measures that will
encourage the formation and operation of enterprises whose capital is
wholly owned by Filipinos. (Emphasis supplied.)
768
768
http://www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/0000014e4a3d8e4fcfd5bc9e000a0094004f00ee/p/AMN451/?username=Guest
72/99
7/1/2015
SUPREMECOURTREPORTSANNOTATEDVOLUME652
769
73/99
7/1/2015
SUPREMECOURTREPORTSANNOTATEDVOLUME652
770
74/99
7/1/2015
SUPREMECOURTREPORTSANNOTATEDVOLUME652
771
771
772
75/99
7/1/2015
SUPREMECOURTREPORTSANNOTATEDVOLUME652
773
76/99
7/1/2015
SUPREMECOURTREPORTSANNOTATEDVOLUME652
774
77/99
7/1/2015
SUPREMECOURTREPORTSANNOTATEDVOLUME652
775
78/99
7/1/2015
SUPREMECOURTREPORTSANNOTATEDVOLUME652
776
79/99
7/1/2015
SUPREMECOURTREPORTSANNOTATEDVOLUME652
777
http://www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/0000014e4a3d8e4fcfd5bc9e000a0094004f00ee/p/AMN451/?username=Guest
80/99
7/1/2015
SUPREMECOURTREPORTSANNOTATEDVOLUME652
778
81/99
7/1/2015
SUPREMECOURTREPORTSANNOTATEDVOLUME652
779
82/99
7/1/2015
SUPREMECOURTREPORTSANNOTATEDVOLUME652
780
780
http://www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/0000014e4a3d8e4fcfd5bc9e000a0094004f00ee/p/AMN451/?username=Guest
83/99
7/1/2015
SUPREMECOURTREPORTSANNOTATEDVOLUME652
781
782
http://www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/0000014e4a3d8e4fcfd5bc9e000a0094004f00ee/p/AMN451/?username=Guest
84/99
7/1/2015
SUPREMECOURTREPORTSANNOTATEDVOLUME652
In the same way, the SEC has also adopted the same
interpretation of the word capital to various laws or
statutes imposing a minimum on Filipino ownership. In an
Opinion dated November 11, 1988 addressed to Mr. Nito
Doria, which involved Executive Order No. 226, otherwise
known as the Omnibus Investments Code of 1987, the SEC
stated:
For permitted and permissible investments, the maximum
percentage of control allowable to foreign investors is found in
Sections 46 and 47 of the Omnibus Investments Code of 1987,
copy enclosed. In relation thereto, Outstanding capital stock
refers to the total shares issued to subscribers or stockholders,
whether or not fully or partially paid, except treasury shares.
(Section 137, Corporation Code of the Philippines), and it is
immaterial how the stock is classified, whether as common or
preferred, (SEC Opinions, dated June 13, 1988, April 14, 1987,
and February 15, 1988).
783
85/99
7/1/2015
SUPREMECOURTREPORTSANNOTATEDVOLUME652
784
86/99
7/1/2015
SUPREMECOURTREPORTSANNOTATEDVOLUME652
785
87/99
7/1/2015
SUPREMECOURTREPORTSANNOTATEDVOLUME652
which reads:
x x x x The participation of foreign investors in the
governing body of any public utility enterprise shall be
limited to their proportionate share in its capital, and all
the executive and managing officers of such corporation or
association must be citizens of the Philippines. (Emphasis
supplied.)
The
aforequoted
constitutional
provision
is
unequivocalit limits the participation of the foreign
investors in the governing body to their proportionate
share in the capital of the corporation. Participation is the
act of taking part in something.81 Accordingly, it includes
the right to elect or vote for in the election of the members
of the Board of Directors. However, this right to participate
in the election is restricted by the first sentence of Sec. 11
such that their right cannot exceed their proportionate
share in the capital, i.e., 40%. In other words, the right of
foreign investors to elect the members of the Board of
Directors cannot exceed the voting rights of the 40% of the
common shares, even though their ownership of common
shares may exceed 40%. Thus, since they can only vote up
to 40% of the common shares of the corporation, they will
never be in a position to elect majority of the members of
the Board of Directors. Consequently, control over the
membership of the Board of Directors will always be in the
hands of Filipino stockholders although they actually own
less than 50% of the common shares.
Let Us apply the foregoing principles to the situation of
PLDT. Granting without admitting that foreigners own
_______________
81 BLACKS LAW DICTIONARY (9th ed. 2009).
786
786
88/99
7/1/2015
SUPREMECOURTREPORTSANNOTATEDVOLUME652
787
89/99
7/1/2015
SUPREMECOURTREPORTSANNOTATEDVOLUME652
788
90/99
7/1/2015
SUPREMECOURTREPORTSANNOTATEDVOLUME652
789
91/99
7/1/2015
SUPREMECOURTREPORTSANNOTATEDVOLUME652
790
92/99
7/1/2015
SUPREMECOURTREPORTSANNOTATEDVOLUME652
791
93/99
7/1/2015
SUPREMECOURTREPORTSANNOTATEDVOLUME652
792
793
94/99
7/1/2015
SUPREMECOURTREPORTSANNOTATEDVOLUME652
IN
Ed., p. 87 citing Smith, Bell and Co. v. Natividad, 40 Phil 136, 148 (1919)
Luzon Stevedoring Corporation v. AntiDummy Board, 46 SCRA 474, 490
(1972) DE LEON, HECTOR S., PHILIPPINE CONSTITUTIONAL LAW (Principles and
Cases), 2004 Ed., Vol. 2, p. 940.
6 DE LEON, HECTOR S., PHILIPPINE CONSTITUTIONAL LAW (Principles and
Cases), 2004 Ed., Vol. 2, p. 946.
794
794
95/99
7/1/2015
SUPREMECOURTREPORTSANNOTATEDVOLUME652
795
96/99
7/1/2015
SUPREMECOURTREPORTSANNOTATEDVOLUME652
ON THE
CORPORATION CODE
OF THE
796
97/99
7/1/2015
SUPREMECOURTREPORTSANNOTATEDVOLUME652
797
98/99
7/1/2015
SUPREMECOURTREPORTSANNOTATEDVOLUME652
Copyright2015CentralBookSupply,Inc.Allrightsreserved.
http://www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/0000014e4a3d8e4fcfd5bc9e000a0094004f00ee/p/AMN451/?username=Guest
99/99