JULIAN E. TUASON v. LA PREVISORA
FILIPINA
G.R. No. L-44579, December 24, 1938
Corporation Law Case Digest by John Paul C.
Ladiao (15 March 2016)
(Topic: Consideration for Stocks and
Transfer)
FACTS:
Appellee
Juan E. Tuason had been a stockholder of the defendant and appellant, La
Previsora Filipina, Mutual Building and Loan Association, since 1929, having
acquired on different dates shares of stock thereof of the series M and C, at
the par value of P200 per share with a guaranteed dividend of 10 per cent. Plaintiff
acted as treasurer of defendant corporation from February 27, 1932, up to
February 1, 1933. On February 15, 1932, said plaintiff subscribed for 50,000
accumulative shares of series A, paying on account the sum of P5,000, value of
twenty-five shares subscribed and paid for by him, which he had exchanged for
the equivalent value of the aforesaid accumulative shares in accordance with
section 25 of the by-laws of the association. The corresponding certificate of
stock, which bears number 8463 (Exhibit 5), had been prepared by defendant
corporation and was dated February 15, 1932. On February 19, of the same year,
said defendant corporation addressed a letter (Exhibit 4) to plaintiff in which
it informed him that the certificate (Exhibit 5) issued by it in his favor for
50,000 accumulative shares of series A, bearing number 8463, remained at his
disposal in the office of said defendant where he might get the same when he so
desired.
On August 1,
1932, the Collector of Internal Revenue, after an investigation, discovered
that defendant had not affixed documentary stamps on the aforesaid certificate
No. 8463 in violation of section 1449 (b) of Act No. 2711, for which reason he
required defendant to pay P10,000 for documentary stamps (Exhibit 35). In view
of said demand, the board of directors of defendant corporation, by resolution
of August 4, 1932, agreed to pay the aforesaid amount.
Plaintiff
Juan E. Tuason having failed to pay the remaining installments on the price of
the 50,000 accumulative shares of series A, defendant corporation, by
resolution of its board of directors of November 10, 1932, declared said shares
forfeited in December, 1932.
On March 9,
1934, defendant corporation demanded of plaintiff, through the letter Exhibit
Q, the reimbursement of the sum paid by it for documentary stamps.
ISSUE:
Whether or
not plaintiff was bound to reimburse defendant corporation for the value of the
documentary stamps which the committee appointed by the Collector of Internal
Revenue has affixed to certificate No. 8463 for 50,000 shares of stock issued
in the name of said plaintiff?
HELD:
NO.
If the
obligation to pay the value of the documentary stamps which were affixed to the
certificate of stock — supposing that plaintiff had agreed with defendant corporation
to assume the same, which he, however, denies and no authentic evidence in the
affirmative has been shown — arises from the existence of said right, upon the
latter's disappearance, the former can not exist upon the principle that when
there is no cause there can be no effect. When more than one year after, or on
April 25, 1934, the committee appointed by the Acting of Internal Revenue
affixed to the stub Exhibit B of the said certificate No. 8463 the documentary
stamps in question and immediately cancelled them, plaintiff had no longer
anything to do with the shares of stock which represented said certificate, and
he can not now be made to answer for the payment of their value.
In view of
the foregoing, we are of the opinion and so hold: First that the mere making of
a certificate of stock in the name of the subscriber thereof by installments
and its signing by the officers of a mutual building and loan association,
without affixing thereto the corresponding documentary stamps, does not
constitute an issue of said certificate, notwithstanding the notice which the
secretary of said association might have sent to the said subscriber advising
him of its issuance and informing him that said certificate "was at his
disposal whenever he desired or had time to get it"; second, that a
subscriber of shares of stock in an association is not bound to pay the
documentary stamp tax required by law, unless he had agreed with the
association to assume payment thereof; and third, that even when there is such
an agreement, if before the issuance of the shares of stock the right of the
subscriber to the same is declared forfeited, said subscriber is likewise not
bound to pay said tax.
Hello Everybody,
ReplyDeleteMy name is Mrs Sharon Sim. I live in Singapore and i am a happy woman today? and i told my self that any lender that rescue my family from our poor situation, i will refer any person that is looking for loan to him, he gave me happiness to me and my family, i was in need of a loan of S$250,000.00 to start my life all over as i am a single mother with 3 kids I met this honest and GOD fearing man loan lender that help me with a loan of S$250,000.00 SG. Dollar, he is a GOD fearing man, if you are in need of loan and you will pay back the loan please contact him tell him that is Mrs Sharon, that refer you to him. contact Dr Purva Pius,via email:(urgentloan22@gmail.com) Thank you.
BORROWERS APPLICATION DETAILS
1. Name Of Applicant in Full:……..
2. Telephone Numbers:……….
3. Address and Location:…….
4. Amount in request………..
5. Repayment Period:………..
6. Purpose Of Loan………….
7. country…………………
8. phone…………………..
9. occupation………………
10.age/sex…………………
11.Monthly Income…………..
12.Email……………..
Regards.
Managements
Email Kindly Contact: urgentloan22@gmail.com