Pacific Rehouse Corp.

vs CA & Export and Industry Bank

G.R. No. 199687, March 24, 2014

J. Reyes

Pacific Rehouse is the petitioner in a case against E-Securities for unauthorized sale of DMCI shares
of the former. The judgment against E-Securities became final and executory. When the Writ of
Execution was returned unsatisfied, Pacific Rehouse moved for issuance of Alias Writ of Execution
to hold respondent EIB liable for the judgment obligation as E- Securities because it wholly-owned
and controlled by the latter.

The RTC issued the Writ arguing that E-Securities is a mere alter-ego. CA enjoined the issuance of
the Alias Writ because of lack of proof as to the proper piercing of the veil of corporate fiction. EIB
contends that the court did not acquire jurisdiction over its person, hence there is no basis for
piercing the veil.

Issue: Whether the alter-ego doctrine may be applied against EIB, a party not impleaded in the
case?

SC: No. The Court did not acquire jurisdiction over EIB’s person.

EIB was never impleaded even in the case against E-Securities. It never had the chance to present
evidence in trial to deny or affirm the consequent piercing of the veil.

A corporation not impleaded in a suit cannot be subject to the court’s process of piercing the veil
of its corporate fiction. Any proceedings taken against that corporation and its property would
infringe on its right to due process. As Export Bank was neither served with summons, nor has it
voluntarily appeared before the court, the judgment sought to be enforced against E-Securities
cannot be made against its parent company, Export Bank