Held
No, Enrique's action against Jan for the release of the title and damages will not prosper, under Section 184 of the Revised Corporation Code of the Philippines and Section 25 of the Property Registration Decree.
Explanation
The Property Registration Decree requires the owner or developer to deliver the title to the buyer upon full payment of the lot or unit. If there is an outstanding mortgage on the property at the time of issuance of the title, the owner or developer must redeem the mortgage or the corresponding portion within six months from issuance so that the title can be secured and delivered to the buyer. This means that the owner or developer has the obligation to clear any mortgage encumbrance before the title can be released to the buyer.
Under the Revised Corporation Code, the dissolution of a corporation does not extinguish its rights or liabilities. Section 184 explicitly states that no right or remedy in favor of or against a corporation or its officers shall be removed or impaired by the dissolution of the corporation. Furthermore, Section 139 provides that a dissolved corporation continues to exist as a body corporate for three years after dissolution for the purpose of settling and closing its affairs, including prosecuting and defending suits and disposing of property. This means that the dissolved corporations involved—Everstone Realty Corporation, Money Bank, and Vault Bank—retain their corporate existence for winding up their affairs, including obligations related to the subdivision unit.
The case law emphasizes that corporate officers, such as Jan as President of Vault Bank, are generally not personally liable for corporate obligations unless there is gross negligence, bad faith, or unlawful acts. The piercing of the corporate veil is disfavored and only allowed when the corporate entity is used to perpetrate fraud or injustice. Without evidence of such misconduct, Jan cannot be held personally liable for the release of the title or damages.
Application to the facts
Enrique fully paid the purchase price for the subdivision unit from Everstone Realty Corporation, but the title has not been released. The unit was mortgaged to Money Bank, which assigned the loan and mortgage to Vault Bank. All three corporations have been dissolved. Under Section 25 of the Property Registration Decree, Everstone Realty Corporation, as the owner or developer, was required to redeem the mortgage within six months after issuance of the title to Enrique to enable the release of the title. Since the mortgage was assigned to Vault Bank, the obligation to redeem the mortgage and release the title would fall on Vault Bank.
However, all three corporations are dissolved. Under Section 139 of the Revised Corporation Code, these corporations continue to exist for three years after dissolution to settle and close their affairs, including disposing of property and prosecuting or defending suits. Therefore, the corporations still have the capacity to act on their obligations related to the subdivision unit.
Enrique sued Jan, the President of Vault Bank, personally for the release of the title and damages. Based on the case law, corporate officers are not personally liable for corporate obligations unless there is gross negligence or bad faith. There is no indication that Jan acted with gross negligence or bad faith. The corporate veil cannot be pierced merely because the corporations are dissolved. Thus, Jan cannot be held personally liable for the release of the title or damages.
Enrique's proper recourse is against the dissolved corporations themselves, which still exist for winding up their affairs. If the corporations fail to act, Enrique may seek remedies through the proper legal channels, such as filing a case against the corporations or their trustees or assignees if any have been appointed to manage the winding up.
"Issuance of Title. The owner or developer shall deliver the title of the lot or unit to the buyer upon full payment of the lot or unit. No fee, except those required for the registration of the deed of sale in the Registry of Deeds, shall be collected for the issuance of such title. In the event a mortgage over the lot or unit is outstanding at the time of the issuance of the title to the buyer, the owner or developer shall redeem the mortgage or the corresponding portion thereof within six months from such issuance in order that the title over any fully paid lot or unit may be secured and delivered to the buyer…
Section 25 of the Property Registration Decree provides that the owner or developer must deliver the title of the lot or unit to the buyer upon full payment, and if there is an outstanding mortgage at the time of issuance, the owner or developer must redeem the mortgage or the corresponding portion within six months from such issuance so that the title may be secured and delivered to the buyer.
Section 184 of the Revised Corporation Code states that the dissolution of a corporation does not remove or impair any right or remedy in favor of or against the corporation or its officers, nor any liability incurred by them.
Section 139 of the Revised Corporation Code provides that, except for banks, every corporation whose existence is terminated remains as a body corporate for three years after dissolution for the purpose of prosecuting and defending suits, settling and closing its affairs, and disposing of and conveying its property, but not for continuing its business.
Laws retrieved
Everything retrieval surfaced, not only what the answer relied on. Read the ones it quotes.
- Section 25, Property Registration Decree and Related Laws
- Sec 184, Revised Corporation Code of the Philippines
- Sec 139, Revised Corporation Code of the Philippines
- Sec 30, Revised Corporation Code of the Philippines
- Section 18, Property Registration Decree and Related Laws
- Section 4, Property Registration Decree and Related Laws
"The Court's Ruling The petitions are partly meritorious. _Uy is not liable; The piercing of the veil of corporate fiction is not justified_ The heirs of Uy argue that the latter could not be held liable for being merely an officer of Hammer and Goldkey because it was not shown that she had committed any actionable wrong22 or that she had participated in the transaction between Hammer and iBank. They further claim that she had cut all ties with Hammer and her husband long before the execution of the loan.23 The Court finds in favor of Uy. Basic is the rule in corporation law that a corporation is a juridical enti…
"Whether the CA correctly ruled that petitioners are liable to Bancom for (a) the payment of the loan amounts indicated on the Promissory Notes issued by Marbella; and (b) attorney's fees OUR RULING We DENY the Petition. _The revocation of Bancom's Certificate of Registration does not justify the abatement of these proceedings._ Section 12235 of the Corporation Code provides that a corporation whose charter is annulled, or whose corporate existence is otherwise terminated, may continue as a body corporate for a limited period of three years, but only for certain specific purposes enumerated by law. ... These incl…
Cases retrieved
Everything retrieval surfaced, not only what the answer relied on. Read the ones it quotes.