Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 61 views

    Pilipinas Shell Petroleum Corp. V Royal Ferry Services

    Uploaded by

    Jeunaj Lardizabal
    The Supreme Court ruled that the petition for voluntary insolvency was properly filed in the RTC of Manila, not Makati as argued. Under insolvency law, the proper venue is the RTC where the insolvent debtor resided for at least 6 months prior. Here, while the articles of incorporation listed Makati as the principal office, Royal Ferry had moved to and conducted business from Manila for over 6 months. The actual place of business controls over what is stated in incorporation documents. Filing in Manila was also more convenient given the location of the corporation's assets and records.

    Copyright:

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

    Pilipinas Shell Petroleum Corp. V Royal Ferry Services

    Uploaded by

    Jeunaj Lardizabal
    61 views2 pages
    The Supreme Court ruled that the petition for voluntary insolvency was properly filed in the RTC of Manila, not Makati as argued. Under insolvency law, the proper venue is the RTC where the insolvent debtor resided for at least 6 months prior. Here, while the articles of incorporation listed Makati as the principal office, Royal Ferry had moved to and conducted business from Manila for over 6 months. The actual place of business controls over what is stated in incorporation documents. Filing in Manila was also more convenient given the location of the corporation's assets and records.

    Original Title

    54. Pilipinas Shell Petroleum Corp. v Royal Ferry Services

    Copyright

    © © All Rights Reserved

    Available Formats

    DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    The Supreme Court ruled that the petition for voluntary insolvency was properly filed in the RTC of Manila, not Makati as argued. Under insolvency law, the proper venue is the RTC where the insolvent debtor resided for at least 6 months prior. Here, while the articles of incorporation listed Makati as the principal office, Royal Ferry had moved to and conducted business from Manila for over 6 months. The actual place of business controls over what is stated in incorporation documents. Filing in Manila was also more convenient given the location of the corporation's assets and records.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as docx, pdf, or txt
    61 views2 pages

    Pilipinas Shell Petroleum Corp. V Royal Ferry Services

    Uploaded by

    Jeunaj Lardizabal
    The Supreme Court ruled that the petition for voluntary insolvency was properly filed in the RTC of Manila, not Makati as argued. Under insolvency law, the proper venue is the RTC where the insolvent debtor resided for at least 6 months prior. Here, while the articles of incorporation listed Makati as the principal office, Royal Ferry had moved to and conducted business from Manila for over 6 months. The actual place of business controls over what is stated in incorporation documents. Filing in Manila was also more convenient given the location of the corporation's assets and records.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as docx, pdf, or txt
    of 2

    LOPEZ, KIMBERLY O.

    CORORATION LAW: JD3B

    54. Pilipinas Shell Petroleum Corporation v Royal Ferry Services, Inc.


    GR No. 183843, January 19, 2017

    DOCTRINE: The proper venue for a petition for voluntary insolvency of an insolvent corporation is the
    RTC of the actual place, province or city where the insolvent debtor has resided in for six (6) months
    before the filing of the petition and should there be conflict between the place stated in the articles of
    incorporation and the physical location of the corporation's main office, the actual place of business
    should control.

    FACTS:

    1. The respondent, Royal Ferry Services, Inc. initiated a voluntary insolvency proceedings
    before the RTC of Manila. The court granted the petition and issued an order declaring
    respondent insolvent.
    2. Petitioner, Pilipinas Shell filed for a motion to dismiss on the ground of wrong venue. It
    argued that it should be filed before the court with territorial jurisdiction over the
    corporation's residence which in this case is in Makati as indicated in its Articles of
    Incorporation stating that its principal office is located in Makati City. In which case, the
    Petition should have been filed before the RTC of Makati and not before the RTC of Manila.
    3. The petition was dismissed on the grounds that Royal Ferry sufficiently complied with the
    Insolvency Law on venue and that it had abandoned its Makati office and moved to Manila
    and that the confiscated Royal Ferry's books and that the personal assets and properties
    were taken from a Manila address.
    4. In Shell’s motion for reconsideration, it was held that a corporation cannot change its place
    of business without amending its Articles of Incorporation, otherwise transfer did not
    produce any legal effect on its residence.
    5. On appeal of Royal Ferry, CA overturned the trial court’s decision and ruled that RTC of
    Manila has jurisdiction over the case.

    ISSUE:
    Whether the Petition for Voluntary Insolvency was properly filed in the RTC of Manila

    HELD:
    Yes, the Petition for Voluntary Insolvency was properly filed in the RTC of Manila.
    First, jurisdiction is acquired based on the allegations in the complaint. Second, the rules
    provide that rule on venue under the rules of court shall not apply where there is a specific rule or
    law for it.

    In this case, the respondent alleged that its principal office is located in Manila. Under the
    Insolvency Law, it specifies that the proper venue for a petition for voluntary insolvency is the RTC
    of the actual place, province or city where the insolvent debtor has resided in for six (6) months
    before the filing of the petition. If there is a conflict between the place stated in the articles of
    incorporation and the physical location of the corporation's main office, the actual place of business
    should control. The six (6)-month qualification of the law's requirement of residence shows intent
    to find the most accurate location of the debtor's activities. The court underscored that the
    rationale for this is for the convenience of the litigants as there is a need to control the property of
    the insolvent corporation and as insolvency proceedings follow their course as speedily as possible
    in order that a discharge, if the insolvent debtor is entitled to it, should be decreed without
    unreasonable delay.
    Thus, the Petition for Voluntary Insolvency was properly filed by Royal Services in the RTC
    of Manila.

    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