Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 488 views

    CASTRO Lao vs. Lao

    Uploaded by

    ReyvilleMateoCaratiquit
    This case discusses whether merely including someone as a shareholder in a corporation's General Information Sheet filed with the SEC is sufficient proof that they are a shareholder. The Supreme Court ruled that it is not sufficient proof, and that a stock certificate is prima facie evidence of shareholder status. While the petitioners were listed as shareholders in the GIS, the corporate books did not show that they held any stock certificates, so they were not deemed shareholders. The Court found that the information in a GIS must be correlated with the corporate books, and the corporate books prevail over the GIS.

    Copyright:

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

    CASTRO Lao vs. Lao

    Uploaded by

    ReyvilleMateoCaratiquit
    488 views2 pages
    This case discusses whether merely including someone as a shareholder in a corporation's General Information Sheet filed with the SEC is sufficient proof that they are a shareholder. The Supreme Court ruled that it is not sufficient proof, and that a stock certificate is prima facie evidence of shareholder status. While the petitioners were listed as shareholders in the GIS, the corporate books did not show that they held any stock certificates, so they were not deemed shareholders. The Court found that the information in a GIS must be correlated with the corporate books, and the corporate books prevail over the GIS.

    Original Title

    CASTRO Lao vs. Lao.docx

    Copyright

    © © All Rights Reserved

    Available Formats

    DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    This case discusses whether merely including someone as a shareholder in a corporation's General Information Sheet filed with the SEC is sufficient proof that they are a shareholder. The Supreme Court ruled that it is not sufficient proof, and that a stock certificate is prima facie evidence of shareholder status. While the petitioners were listed as shareholders in the GIS, the corporate books did not show that they held any stock certificates, so they were not deemed shareholders. The Court found that the information in a GIS must be correlated with the corporate books, and the corporate books prevail over the GIS.

    Copyright:

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

    CASTRO Lao vs. Lao

    Uploaded by

    ReyvilleMateoCaratiquit
    This case discusses whether merely including someone as a shareholder in a corporation's General Information Sheet filed with the SEC is sufficient proof that they are a shareholder. The Supreme Court ruled that it is not sufficient proof, and that a stock certificate is prima facie evidence of shareholder status. While the petitioners were listed as shareholders in the GIS, the corporate books did not show that they held any stock certificates, so they were not deemed shareholders. The Court found that the information in a GIS must be correlated with the corporate books, and the corporate books prevail over the GIS.

    Copyright:

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

    COMMERCIAL LAW REVIEW

    CORPORATION LAW
    CASE TITLE DAVID C. LAO AND JOSE LAO VS. DIONISIO C. LAO
    CITATION G.R. No. 170585
    PROMULGATION
    October 6, 2008
    DATE
    DIGEST BY Castro, Ernest
    TOPIC COVERED Stockholders

    DOCTRINE: The mere inclusion as shareholder of petitioners in the General Information Sheet of
    PFSC is insufficient proof that they are shareholders of the company. A certificate of stock is the
    evidence of a holder’s interest and status in a corporation—it is prima facie evidence that the holder
    is a shareholder of a corporation. Corporate books prevail over the General Information Sheet.

    PONENTE:

    REYES, R.T., J:

    FACTS:

    Petitioners David and Jose Lao filed a petition with the SEC against respondent Dionisio Lao,
    president of Pacific Foundry Shop Corporation (PFSC). Petitioners prayed for a declaration as
    stockholders and directors of PFSC, issuance of certificates of shares in their name and to be allowed
    to examine the corporate books of PFSC. Petitioners claimed that they are stockholders of PFSC based
    on the General Information Sheet (GIS) filed with the SEC, in which they are named as stockholders
    and directors of the corporation. Petitioners claim that the respondent is estopped from contesting the
    GIS. Records, however, disclose that petitioners have no certificates of shares in their name.

    ISSUE:

    Whether the mere inclusion as shareholder in the General Information Sheet of a corporation
    constitutes as a sufficient proof that one is a shareholder in such corporation.

    RULING:

    NO. The mere inclusion as shareholder of petitioners in the General Information Sheet of PFSC
    is insufficient proof that they are shareholders of the company.

    A certificate of stock is the evidence of a holder's interest and status in a corporation. It


    is a written instrument signed by the proper officer of a corporation stating or acknowledging that the
    person named in the document is the owner of a designated number of shares of its stock. It is prima
    facie evidence that the holder is a shareholder of a corporation.

    While it may be true that petitioners were named as shareholders in the General Information
    Sheet submitted to the SEC, that document alone does not conclusively prove that they are
    shareholders of PFSC. The information in the document will still have to be correlated with the corporate
    Page 1
    COMMERCIAL LAW REVIEW
    CORPORATION LAW
    books of PFSC. As between the General Information Sheet and the corporate books, it is the latter that
    is controlling.

    Page 2

    You might also like