Scribd
Upload
123 views1 page

Inspection Rights in Corporate Disputes

This case involves a dispute between shareholders of two family-owned corporations, Vibelle Manufacturing Corporation and Genato Investments, Inc. Eduardo Ang requested to inspect the corporate books and records of the companies, but his request was denied by the other shareholders, including the petitioners. Eduardo then filed a complaint alleging violations of Section 74 of the Corporation Code regarding shareholder rights to inspection. The petitioners argued that Eduardo intended to use the information against the companies' interests, as there was ongoing litigation between Eduardo and the companies. The Supreme Court ultimately ruled that the petitioners did not violate Section 74 because Eduardo's request was not made in good faith and for a legitimate purpose, as required by law

Uploaded by

Rose Faith Ibarra
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
123 views1 page

Inspection Rights in Corporate Disputes

This case involves a dispute between shareholders of two family-owned corporations, Vibelle Manufacturing Corporation and Genato Investments, Inc. Eduardo Ang requested to inspect the corporate books and records of the companies, but his request was denied by the other shareholders, including the petitioners. Eduardo then filed a complaint alleging violations of Section 74 of the Corporation Code regarding shareholder rights to inspection. The petitioners argued that Eduardo intended to use the information against the companies' interests, as there was ongoing litigation between Eduardo and the companies. The Supreme Court ultimately ruled that the petitioners did not violate Section 74 because Eduardo's request was not made in good faith and for a legitimate purpose, as required by law

Uploaded by

Rose Faith Ibarra
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

ANG-ABAYA v.

ANG

G.R. No. 178511 December 4, 2008

The stockholder’s right of inspection of the corporation’s book and records is based upon their
ownership of the assets and property of the corporation. It is, therefore, an incident of ownership of
the corporate property, whether this ownership or interest be termed an equitable ownership, a
beneficial ownership, or a quasi-ownership. This right is predicated upon the necessity of self-
protection. The inspection has to be germane to the petitioner’s interest as a stockholder, and has to
be proper and lawful in character and not inimical to the interest of the corporation.

FACTS: Vibelle Manufacturing Corporation (VMC) and Genato Investments, Inc. (Genato) are family-
owned corporations, where petitioners and private respondent Eduardo Ang are shareholders,
officers and members of the board of directors.

Prior to the instant controversy, VMC, Genato, and Oriano Manufacturing Corp. filed a Civil case
4257-MC against Eduardo, together with Michael, and some other persons for allegedly conniving to
fraudulently wrest control/management of the corporations.

During the pendency of the above-mentioned Civil Case, particularly in July 2004, Eduardo sought
permission to inspect the corporate books of VMC and Genato on account of petitioners alleged
failure to update him on the financial and business activities of these family corporations.

Petitioners denied the request claiming that Eduardo would use the information obtained from said
inspection for purposes inimical to the corporations’ interests. Because of petitioners’ refusal to
grant Eduardo’s request, the latter filed an Affidavit-Complaint against petitioners, charging them
with violation of two counts of Sec. 74 (Corporation Code), in relation to Sec. 144.

Petitioners denied violating Sec. 74 and reiterated the allegations contained in their complaint in Civ.
Case 4257-MC. They alleged that Eduardo consistently pressured petitioner Flordeliza, his daughter,
to improperly transfer ownership of the corporations’ V.A.G building to him. When the proposed
transfer of the V.A.G. building did not materialize, petitioners claim that Eduardo instituted an action
to compel donation of said property to him. Moreover, they claim that Eduardo attempted to
forcibly evict petitioner Jason from his office at VMC so he can occupy the same; that Eduardo and
his cohorts constantly created trouble by intervening in the daily operations of the corporations
without the knowledge or consent of the board of directors.

ISSUE: Whether the petitioners violated Sec, 74 of the Corporation Code

RULING: NO. The stockholders’ right to inspect corporate books is not without limitations. It is now
expressly required as a condition for such examination that the one requesting it must not have
been guilty of using improperly any information secured through a prior examination, or that the
person asking for such examination must be acting in good faith and for a legitimate purpose in
making his demand.

In order therefore for the penal provision under Sec 144 of the Corporation Code to apply in a case
of violation of a stockholder or members right to inspect the corporate books/records the elements
provided for under Sec 74 must be present.

ANG-ABAYA v. ANG G.R. No. 178511 December 4, 2008 The stockholder’s right of inspection of the corporation’s book and record

You might also like