Scribd
Upload
461 views2 pages

R.N. Symaco Vs Santos - Digest

1) Respondent (MFBAI) is a non-stock corporation that leased property from Mariano Guison for 10 years to use for its fish business. After Guison died, Norma Symaco executed a new lease over the same property. 2) Luisito Santos, a member of MFBAI, filed a complaint to annul the new lease on behalf of MFBAI, claiming Symaco had no right to lease the property. Symaco argued Santos had no standing to file on behalf of the corporation. 3) The court ruled Santos was not a legitimate member of MFBAI based on its by-laws so he did not have standing to file a derivative suit on the

Uploaded by

Armand Patiño Alforque
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
461 views2 pages

R.N. Symaco Vs Santos - Digest

1) Respondent (MFBAI) is a non-stock corporation that leased property from Mariano Guison for 10 years to use for its fish business. After Guison died, Norma Symaco executed a new lease over the same property. 2) Luisito Santos, a member of MFBAI, filed a complaint to annul the new lease on behalf of MFBAI, claiming Symaco had no right to lease the property. Symaco argued Santos had no standing to file on behalf of the corporation. 3) The court ruled Santos was not a legitimate member of MFBAI based on its by-laws so he did not have standing to file a derivative suit on the

Uploaded by

Armand Patiño Alforque
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/ 2

Republic of the Philippines

SUPREME COURT
SECOND DIVISION
G.R. No. 142474. August 18, 2005
R.N. SYMACO TRADING CORPORATION and/or NORMA SYMACO, ESTATE OF MARIANO GUISON,
Petitioners,
vs.
LUISITO T. SANTOS, for and in behalf of the MALABON FISH BROKERS ASSOCIATION, INC.,
Respondent.

Facts:
Respondent (MFBAI) is a non-stock corporation engaged in the business of buying and selling fish and
other marine products. MFBAI executed a contract of lease with Mariano Guison as lessor for a period of
ten years, renewable on such terms as agreed upon the parties. Upon the death of Mariano Guison,
Norma Symaco who was also a member of the MFBAI Board of Directors, and the President and Chairman
of the Board of Directors of petitioner executed an unnotarized contract of lease over the property
previously leased to MFBAI.
Respondent Santos as an MFBAI member and as a nominal party filed a complaint for the annulment of the
Contract of Lease between the Hrs of Mariano Guison and defendant Symaco in behalf of the MFBAI. In
their answer to the complaint, petitioners alleged that Santos was has no standing to file the complaint in
behalf of the corporation.
Issue:
Whether or not plaintiff Santos cannot bring a derivative suit for and in behalf of the MFBAI?
Ruling:
The court agreed with the petitioners contention that Santos is not a legitimate MFBAI member. The
evidence on record showing the he paid the membership fee and his monthly dues and certification issued
by Lino Buhain that he is a member is not sufficient to qualify him as such member under the By-laws of
respondent MFBAI.
One of the requisites of a derivative suit is that the party bringing the suit should be a stockholder/member
at the time of the action or transaction complained of. The right to sue derivatively is an attribute of
corporate ownership which, to be exercised, requires that the injury alleged be indirect as far as the
stockholders/members are concerned, and direct only insofar as the corporation is concerned. The whole
purpose of the law authorizing a derivative suit is to allow the stockholder/member to enforce rights which
are derivative (secondary) in nature. A derivative action is a suit by a shareholder/member to enforce a
corporate cause of action.

It is enough that a member or a minority of such members file a derivative suit for and in behalf of the
corporation. After all, the members/stockholders who filed a derivative suit are merely nominal parties, the
real party-in-interest being the corporation itself for and in whose behalf the suit is filed. Any monetary
benefits under the decision of the court shall pertain to the corporation.

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