Adelio Cruz v. Quiterio Dalisay
152 SCRA 482, 1987
Corporation Law Case Digest by John Paul C.
Ladiao (15 March 2016)
(Topic: Doctrine of Piercing the Veil of
Corporate Fiction)
FACTS:
In a sworn
complaint dated July 23, 1984, Adelio C. Cruz charged Quiterio L. Dalisay,
Senior Deputy Sheriff of Manila, with "malfeasance in office, corrupt
practices and serious irregularities" allegedly committed as follows:
1. Respondent sheriff attached and/or
levied the money belonging to complainant Cruz when he was not himself the
judgment debtor in the final judgment of NLRC NCR Case No. 8-12389-91 sought to
be enforced but rather the company known as "Qualitrans Limousine Service,
Inc.," a duly registered corporation; and,
2. Respondent likewise caused the
service of the alias writ of execution upon complainant who is a resident of
Pasay City, despite knowledge that his territorial jurisdiction covers Manila
only and does not extend to Pasay City.
In his
Comments, respondent Dalisay explained that when he garnished complainant's
cash deposit at the Philtrust bank, he was merely performing a ministerial
duty. While it is true that said writ was addressed to Qualitrans Limousine
Service, Inc., yet it is also a fact that complainant had executed an affidavit
before the Pasay City assistant fiscal stating that he is the owner/president
of said corporation and, because of that declaration, the counsel for the
plaintiff in the labor case advised him to serve notice of garnishment on the
Philtrust bank.
ISSUE:
Whether or
not Respondent Deputy Sheriff Quiterio L. Dalisay in the enforcement of the
writ of execution in NLRC is correct?
HELD:
No.
Respondent,
however, chose to "pierce the veil of corporate entity" usurping a
power belonging to the court and assumed improvidently that since the
complainant is the owner/president of Qualitrans Limousine Service, Inc., they
are one and the same.
It is a
well-settled doctrine both in law and in equity that as a legal entity, a
corporation has a personality distinct and separate from its individual
stockholders or members. The mere fact that one is president of a corporation
does not render the property he owns or possesses the property of the
corporation, since the president, as individual, and the corporation are
separate entities.
No comments:
Post a Comment