Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 460 views

    Philippine First Insurance Vs Hartigan

    Uploaded by

    Charmila Siplon
    This case involves a dispute over an indemnity agreement signed by Maria Carmen Hartigan in favor of The Yek Tong Lin Fire and Marine Insurance Co., Ltd. The company later changed its name to Philippine First Insurance Co., Inc. Hartigan argued the agreement was only valid for the original company name. The court held that Philippine corporations are authorized by law to change their names, and doing so does not dissolve the original corporation or create a new entity, but merely changes the name. Therefore, the indemnity agreement remained valid and binding despite the name change of the insurance company.

    Copyright:

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

    Philippine First Insurance Vs Hartigan

    Uploaded by

    Charmila Siplon
    460 views2 pages
    This case involves a dispute over an indemnity agreement signed by Maria Carmen Hartigan in favor of The Yek Tong Lin Fire and Marine Insurance Co., Ltd. The company later changed its name to Philippine First Insurance Co., Inc. Hartigan argued the agreement was only valid for the original company name. The court held that Philippine corporations are authorized by law to change their names, and doing so does not dissolve the original corporation or create a new entity, but merely changes the name. Therefore, the indemnity agreement remained valid and binding despite the name change of the insurance company.

    Original Description:

    4. Philippine First Insurance vs Hartigan (1)

    Original Title

    4. Philippine First Insurance vs Hartigan (1)

    Copyright

    © © All Rights Reserved

    Available Formats

    PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    This case involves a dispute over an indemnity agreement signed by Maria Carmen Hartigan in favor of The Yek Tong Lin Fire and Marine Insurance Co., Ltd. The company later changed its name to Philippine First Insurance Co., Inc. Hartigan argued the agreement was only valid for the original company name. The court held that Philippine corporations are authorized by law to change their names, and doing so does not dissolve the original corporation or create a new entity, but merely changes the name. Therefore, the indemnity agreement remained valid and binding despite the name change of the insurance company.

    Copyright:

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

    Philippine First Insurance Vs Hartigan

    Uploaded by

    Charmila Siplon
    This case involves a dispute over an indemnity agreement signed by Maria Carmen Hartigan in favor of The Yek Tong Lin Fire and Marine Insurance Co., Ltd. The company later changed its name to Philippine First Insurance Co., Inc. Hartigan argued the agreement was only valid for the original company name. The court held that Philippine corporations are authorized by law to change their names, and doing so does not dissolve the original corporation or create a new entity, but merely changes the name. Therefore, the indemnity agreement remained valid and binding despite the name change of the insurance company.

    Copyright:

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

    PHILIPPINE FIRST INSURANCE COMPANY,INC.

    vs.

    MARIA CARMEN HARTIGAN

    Facts:
    Plaintiff was originally organized as an insurance corporation under the
    name of The Yek Tong Lin Fire and Marine Insurance Co., Ltd. Its articles of
    incorporation were amended changing the name of the corporation to
    Philippine First Insurance Co., Inc. Subsequently, the plaintiff agreed to act as
    co-maker of the promissory note with defendant Maria Carmen Hartigan,
    CGH upon the application of the defendant who together 2 others, signed an
    indemnity agreement in favor of the plaintiff, undertaking jointly and
    severally, to pay the plaintiff damages, losses or expenses of whatever kind or
    nature which the plaintiff may sustain as a result of the execution by the
    plaintiff as co-maker.The China Banking Corporation delivered to the
    defendant the sum of P5,000.00 which said defendant failed to pay in full.
    The defendants argued that they signed the indemnity agreement in favor of
    the Tek Tong Lin Fire and Marine Insurance Co., Ltd. and not in favor of the
    plaintiff.
    The CFI Ruled against the plaintiff holding that the change of name of
    the Yek Tong Lin Fire & Marine Insurance Co., Ltd. to the Philippine First
    Insurance Co., Inc. is of dubious validity. Such change of name in effect
    dissolved the original corporation by a process of dissolution not authorized
    by our corporation law.

    ISSUE:
    ▪ Is the change of corporate name authorized by law?

    ▪ May a Philippine corporation change its name and still retain its
    original personality and individuality as such?

    HELD:
    ▪ Yes. Section 18 does not only authorize corporations to amend their
    charter; it also lays down the procedure for such amendment. There is no
    prohibition therein against the change of name. The inference is clear that
    such a change is allowed, for if the legislature had intended to enjoin
    corporations from changing names, it would have expressly stated so in this
    section or in any other provision of the law.

    ▪ Yes. As was very aptly said in Pacific Bank v. De Ro, 37 Cal. 538, The
    changing of the name of a corporation is no more the creation of a
    corporation than the changing of the name of a natural person is the
    begetting of a natural person. The act, in both cases, would seem to be what
    the language which we use to designate it imports---- a change of name and
    not a change of being.


    You might also like