Scribd
Upload
28 views1 page

Walakwenta 3

The document discusses a case where an employee was issued from employment and was awarded a judgment. The employer then changed its name but still had control over operations. The court ruled that the judgment could be executed against the current company using the doctrine of piercing corporate fiction since the companies were essentially the same entity.

Uploaded by

Julrey Garcia
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
28 views1 page

Walakwenta 3

The document discusses a case where an employee was issued from employment and was awarded a judgment. The employer then changed its name but still had control over operations. The court ruled that the judgment could be executed against the current company using the doctrine of piercing corporate fiction since the companies were essentially the same entity.

Uploaded by

Julrey Garcia
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
You are on page 1/ 1

issed from his employment by CCC-Equity.

The trial court rendered a decision in favor of the petitioner. The decision became final and,
accordingly, a Writ of Execution was issued. However, the judgment remained unsatisfied, prompting
petitioner to le a Motion for alias Writ of Execution. [Meanwhile, in 1983, CCC became known as the
General Credit Corporation (GCC).]

The Regional Trial Court of Quezon City then issued an Order directing GCC to file its comment
on petitioner's motion. GCC alleged that it was not a party to the case. Consequently, the trial court
ordered the issuance of an alias of writ of execution. Thus, GCC instituted a petition for certiorari with
the Court of Appeals which nullified the order of the trial court.

Issue: whether or not the judgment in favor of petitioner may be executed against respondent General
Credit Corporation applying the doctrine of piercing

RULING: GCC raises corporate fiction as its defense.

The defense of separateness will be disregarded where the business affairs of a subsidiary corporation
are so controlled by the mother corporation to the extent that it becomes an instrument or agent of its
parent. But even when there is dominance over the affairs of the subsidiary, the doctrine of piercing the
veil of corporate fiction applies only when such fiction is used to defeat public convenience, justify
wrong, protect fraud or defend crime.

In this case, It is Factually and legally, the CCC had dominant control of the business operations of CCC-
QC. The exclusive management contract insured that CCC-QC would be managed and controlled by CCC
and would not deviate from the commands of the mother corporation. In addition to the exclusive
management contract, CCC appointed its own employee, petitioner, as the resident manager of CCC-QC

There were other indications in the record which attest to the applicability of the identity rule in this
case, namely: the unity of interests, management, and control; the transfer of funds to suit their
individual corporate conveniences; and the dominance of policy and practice by the mother corporation
insure that CCC-QC was an instrumentality or agency of CCC. A court judgment becomes useless and
ineffective if the employer, in this case CCC as a mother corporation, is placed beyond the legal reach of
the judgment creditor.

The decision of the Court of Appeals was REVERSED and SET ASIDE.

You might also like

pFad - Phonifier reborn

Pfad - The Proxy pFad of © 2024 Garber Painting. All rights reserved.

Note: This service is not intended for secure transactions such as banking, social media, email, or purchasing. Use at your own risk. We assume no liability whatsoever for broken pages.


Alternative Proxies:

Alternative Proxy

pFad Proxy

pFad v3 Proxy

pFad v4 Proxy