Scribd
Upload
33 views1 page

14chiang Kai Shiek V CA - de Facto Corporations

The document discusses a legal case involving Fausta Oh, a teacher at the Chiang Kai Shiek school, who sued for separation pay and other benefits after being dismissed without assignment. The court ruled that the school, despite not being incorporated, could be sued due to its long existence and recognition by the government, thus denying the petitioner's claim of non-liability. The ruling emphasizes that the school's failure to incorporate should not prevent the private respondent from asserting her claims.

Uploaded by

Ian
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
33 views1 page

14chiang Kai Shiek V CA - de Facto Corporations

The document discusses a legal case involving Fausta Oh, a teacher at the Chiang Kai Shiek school, who sued for separation pay and other benefits after being dismissed without assignment. The court ruled that the school, despite not being incorporated, could be sued due to its long existence and recognition by the government, thus denying the petitioner's claim of non-liability. The ruling emphasizes that the school's failure to incorporate should not prevent the private respondent from asserting her claims.

Uploaded by

Ian
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

FACTS Having been recognized by the government, it was under obligation to

incorporate under the Corporation Law within 90 days from such


Respondent Fausta Oh had been teaching in Petitioner Chiang Kai Shiek’s
recognition. It appears that it had not done so at the time the complaint
school in Sorsogon since 1932, for a continuous period of almost 33 years,
was filed notwithstanding that it had been in existence even earlier than
until the 1st week of July 1968 when she was told she had no assignment
1932. The petitioner cannot now invoke its own non-compliance with the
for the semester. Oh sued, demanding separation pay, social security
law to immunize it from the private respondent's complaint.
benefits, salary differentials, and moral and exemplary damages. Originally,
the defendant was the Chiang Kai Shiek school, but when it filed a Motion There should also be no question that having contracted with the private
to Dismiss on the ground that it could not be sued, the complaint was respondent every year for thirty two years and thus represented itself as
amended to include certain school officials to make them solidarily liable. possessed of juridical personality to do so, the petitioner is now estopped
from denying such personality to defeat her claim against it. According to
The CFI of Sorsogon dismissed the complaint. On appeal, the CA reversed
Article 1431 of the Civil Code, "through estoppel an admission or
the CFI decision and held the school suable and liable, but absolved the
representation is rendered conclusive upon the person making it and
other defendants. Hence, this petition.
cannot be denied or disproved as against the person relying on it."
ISSUE: WON the Petitioner, a school that had not been incorporated, may
As the school itself may be sued in its own name, there is no need to
be sued by reason alone of its long continued existence and recognition by
apply Rule 3, Section 15, under which the persons joined in an association
the government
without any juridical personality may be sued with such association.
RULING Besides, it has been shown that the individual members of the board of
trustees are not liable, having been appointed only after the private
We hold against the petitioner. It is true that Rule 3, Section 1, of the respondent's dismissal. PETITION DENIED.
Rules of Court clearly provides that "only natural or juridical persons may
be parties in a civil action." It is also not denied that the school has not
been incorporated. However, this omission should not prejudice the
private respondent in the assertion of her claims against the school.

As a school, the petitioner was governed by Act No. 2706 as amended by


C.A. No. 180, which provided as follows:

Unless exempted for special reasons by the Secretary of Public Instruction,


any private school or college recognized by the government shall be
incorporated under the provisions of Act No. 1459 known as the
Corporation Law, within 90 days after the date of recognition, and shall file
with the Secretary of Public Instruction a copy of its incorporation papers
and by-laws.

You might also like