Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 77 views

    Won vs. Wack Wack Golf (104 Phil 466) - Digest

    Uploaded by

    Michelle Lim
    Lee E. Won was assigned a membership certificate to Wack Wack Golf & Country Club in 1944. The certificate required assignments to be registered in the club's books. In 1955, Won requested the club register the assignment, but they refused. Won sued for unlawful refusal to register. The club argued the suit was time-barred as more than 5 years had passed since the assignment. However, the court ruled that while Won's right to register existed from the assignment, there was no set period to exercise this right. As Won's right was violated in 1955 when registration was denied, the suit was not time-barred. The court reversed the lower court's decision.

    Copyright:

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

    Won vs. Wack Wack Golf (104 Phil 466) - Digest

    Uploaded by

    Michelle Lim
    77 views1 page
    Lee E. Won was assigned a membership certificate to Wack Wack Golf & Country Club in 1944. The certificate required assignments to be registered in the club's books. In 1955, Won requested the club register the assignment, but they refused. Won sued for unlawful refusal to register. The club argued the suit was time-barred as more than 5 years had passed since the assignment. However, the court ruled that while Won's right to register existed from the assignment, there was no set period to exercise this right. As Won's right was violated in 1955 when registration was denied, the suit was not time-barred. The court reversed the lower court's decision.

    Original Description:

    Case Digest_Corporation Law

    Original Title

    Won vs. Wack Wack Golf (104 Phil 466)_Digest

    Copyright

    © © All Rights Reserved

    Available Formats

    DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    Lee E. Won was assigned a membership certificate to Wack Wack Golf & Country Club in 1944. The certificate required assignments to be registered in the club's books. In 1955, Won requested the club register the assignment, but they refused. Won sued for unlawful refusal to register. The club argued the suit was time-barred as more than 5 years had passed since the assignment. However, the court ruled that while Won's right to register existed from the assignment, there was no set period to exercise this right. As Won's right was violated in 1955 when registration was denied, the suit was not time-barred. The court reversed the lower court's decision.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as docx, pdf, or txt
    77 views1 page

    Won vs. Wack Wack Golf (104 Phil 466) - Digest

    Uploaded by

    Michelle Lim
    Lee E. Won was assigned a membership certificate to Wack Wack Golf & Country Club in 1944. The certificate required assignments to be registered in the club's books. In 1955, Won requested the club register the assignment, but they refused. Won sued for unlawful refusal to register. The club argued the suit was time-barred as more than 5 years had passed since the assignment. However, the court ruled that while Won's right to register existed from the assignment, there was no set period to exercise this right. As Won's right was violated in 1955 when registration was denied, the suit was not time-barred. The court reversed the lower court's decision.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as docx, pdf, or txt
    of 1

    LEE E. WON alias RAMON LEE v. WACK WACK GOLF & COUNTRY CLUB, INC.

    G.R. No. L-10122. August 30, 1958

    FACTS

    In 1944, M. T. Reyes transferred and assigned WACK WACK Membership Certificate to LEE E. WON. The
    certificate in question contains a condition to the effect that no assignment thereof "shall be effective with respect to
    the club until such assignment is registered in the books of the club, as provided in the By-Laws.". On April 26,
    1955, LEE E. WON filed an action in the CIF against WACK WACK GOLF & COUNTRY CLUB, INC.,
    alleging that the latter had refused and still refuses to do so unlawfully to register in its books the assignment in
    favor WON and to issue to the latter a new certificate. On June 6, 1955, WACK WACK filed a motion to dismiss,
    alleging that from 1944, when the plaintiff’s right of action had accrued, to April 26, 1955, when the complaint was
    filed, eleven years have elapsed, and that therefore the complaint was filed beyond the 5-year period fixed in Article
    1149 of the Civil Code.

    ISSUE

    Whether or not the Won was bound, under said condition and By-Laws of WACK WACK or any statutory rule for
    that matter, to present and register the certificate assigned to him in 1944 within any definite or fixed period.

    RULING

    No. The defendant’s contention that from the moment the certificate was assigned to Won, the latter’s right to have
    the assignment registered commenced to exist is correct, however, it would not follow that said right should be
    exercised immediately or within a definite period. The existence of a right is one thing, and the duration of said
    right is another.

    If, as already observed, there is no fixed period for registering an assignment, how can the complaint be considered
    as already barred by the Statute of Limitations when it was filed on April 26, 1955, or barely a few days (according
    to the lower court) and two months (according to the Won), after the demand for registration and its denial by
    WACK WACK. Won’s right was violated only sometime in 1955, and it could not accordingly have asserted any
    cause of action against WACK WACK before that.

    DISPOSITIVE PORTION

    Wherefore, the appealed order is hereby reversed and the case remanded to the court of origin for further
    proceedings. So ordered with costs against the defendant.

    MAIN DOCTRINE

    While the assignee’s right to have the assignment registered commenced from the moment the certificate was
    assigned to him, it would not follow that said right should be exercised immediately or within a definite period. The
    existence of a right is one thing, and the duration of said right is another.

    You might also like