Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 82 views

    Philippine National Bank vs. Aznar 649 SCRA 214 Facts: in 1958, RISCO Ceased Operation Due To Business Reverses. With The Desire

    Uploaded by

    maricar_roca
    1. Stockholders of RISCO contributed funds to purchase land with the intent to rehabilitate the struggling company. However, the land was later attached and purchased by Philippine National Bank (PNB) at an auction. The stockholders filed a complaint to quiet title. 2. The trial court ruled in favor of the stockholders, finding an express trust was created. However, the Court of Appeals overturned this, finding the contributions were a loan secured by a lien, not an express trust. 3. The Supreme Court affirmed no express trust was created as the minutes did not clearly indicate intent to make the stockholders beneficiaries of the land. It also ruled the stockholders had no legal right to file a

    Copyright:

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

    Philippine National Bank vs. Aznar 649 SCRA 214 Facts: in 1958, RISCO Ceased Operation Due To Business Reverses. With The Desire

    Uploaded by

    maricar_roca
    82 views2 pages
    1. Stockholders of RISCO contributed funds to purchase land with the intent to rehabilitate the struggling company. However, the land was later attached and purchased by Philippine National Bank (PNB) at an auction. The stockholders filed a complaint to quiet title. 2. The trial court ruled in favor of the stockholders, finding an express trust was created. However, the Court of Appeals overturned this, finding the contributions were a loan secured by a lien, not an express trust. 3. The Supreme Court affirmed no express trust was created as the minutes did not clearly indicate intent to make the stockholders beneficiaries of the land. It also ruled the stockholders had no legal right to file a

    Original Description:

    case digest, commercial law, corporation law

    Original Title

    PNB v Aznar

    Copyright

    © © All Rights Reserved

    Available Formats

    DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    1. Stockholders of RISCO contributed funds to purchase land with the intent to rehabilitate the struggling company. However, the land was later attached and purchased by Philippine National Bank (PNB) at an auction. The stockholders filed a complaint to quiet title. 2. The trial court ruled in favor of the stockholders, finding an express trust was created. However, the Court of Appeals overturned this, finding the contributions were a loan secured by a lien, not an express trust. 3. The Supreme Court affirmed no express trust was created as the minutes did not clearly indicate intent to make the stockholders beneficiaries of the land. It also ruled the stockholders had no legal right to file a

    Copyright:

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

    Philippine National Bank vs. Aznar 649 SCRA 214 Facts: in 1958, RISCO Ceased Operation Due To Business Reverses. With The Desire

    Uploaded by

    maricar_roca
    1. Stockholders of RISCO contributed funds to purchase land with the intent to rehabilitate the struggling company. However, the land was later attached and purchased by Philippine National Bank (PNB) at an auction. The stockholders filed a complaint to quiet title. 2. The trial court ruled in favor of the stockholders, finding an express trust was created. However, the Court of Appeals overturned this, finding the contributions were a loan secured by a lien, not an express trust. 3. The Supreme Court affirmed no express trust was created as the minutes did not clearly indicate intent to make the stockholders beneficiaries of the land. It also ruled the stockholders had no legal right to file a

    Copyright:

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

    Philippine National Bank vs.

    Aznar 649 SCRA 214


    Facts: In 1958, RISCO ceased operation due to business reverses. With the desire
    to rehabilitate the company, some stockholders of RISCO contributed a total
    amount of P212,720.00 to purchase three (3) parcels of land. The Minutes of the
    Special Meeting of the Board of Directors of RISCO provided that the contributions
    constituted a lien or interest in the lands. The lands were, however, attached and
    was bought by the PNB as the lone and highest bidder. Subsequently, titles were
    issued in the name of PNB which prompted the said stockholders to file a complaint
    for quieting of title.
    The trial court ruled in favor of the plaintiffs on the basis that there was an express
    trust. The decision was, however, set aside by the Court of Appeals on the ground
    that the contributions was a loan secured by a lien rather than an express trust.
    Issues:
    1. Was there an express trust created between RISCO (trustee) and the
    stockholders (beneficiaries)?
    2. Were the stockholders entitled to file a complaint for the quieting of title?
    Ruling:
    1. No. The Court held that Express trusts, sometimes referred to as direct trusts,
    are intentionally created by the direct and positive acts of the settlor or the
    trustorby some writing, deed, or will or oral declaration. It is created not
    necessarily by some written words, but by the direct and positive acts of the
    parties. This is in consonance with Article 1444 of the Civil Code, which states
    that no particular words are required for the creation of an express trust, it
    being sufficient that a trust is clearly intended.
    In other words, the creation of an express trust must be manifested with
    reasonable certainty and cannot be inferred from loose and vague declarations
    or from ambiguous circumstances susceptible of other interpretations.
    No such reasonable certitude in the creation of an express trust obtains in the
    case at bar. In fact, a careful scrutiny of the plain and ordinary meaning of the
    terms used in the Minutes does not offer any indication that the parties thereto
    intended that Aznar, et al., become beneficiaries under an express trust and
    that RISCO serve as trustor.
    2. NO. The Court found that Aznar, et al., have no right to ask for the quieting of
    title of the properties at issue because they have no legal and/or equitable
    rights over the properties that are derived from the previous registered owner
    which is RISCO, the pertinent provision of the law is Section 2 of the
    Corporation Code (Batas Pambansa Blg. 68), which states that [a] corporation is
    an artificial being created by operation of law, having the right of succession and

    the powers, attributes and properties expressly authorized by law or incident to


    its existence.
    As a consequence thereof, a corporation has a personality separate and distinct
    from those of its stockholders and other corporations to which it may be
    connected.[24]Thus, we had previously ruled in Magsaysay-Labrador v. Court of
    Appeals[25] that the interest of the stockholders over the properties of the
    corporation is merely inchoate and therefore does not entitle them to intervene
    in litigation involving corporate property.

    You might also like