Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 43 views

    CARLOS V MINDORO

    Uploaded by

    Jan Jason Guerrero Lumanag
    The Board of Directors of the Phil Trust Co. authorized its president to purchase bonds from the Mindoro Sugar Co. and resell them while guaranteeing them to third parties. Phil Trust Co. paid interest to the plaintiff until 1928 when it claimed the guarantee was illegal and void. However, the court held that the guarantee was within Phil Trust Co.'s corporate powers. Additionally, having received money through the contract, Phil Trust Co. was estopped from denying liability. Even if the law prohibited guarantees over capital amounts, sufficient assets from Mindoro Sugar Co. were transferred to Phil Trust Co. to secure payment of bond liabilities.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOC, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content

    You might also like

    CARLOS V MINDORO

    Uploaded by

    Jan Jason Guerrero Lumanag
    43 views1 page
    The Board of Directors of the Phil Trust Co. authorized its president to purchase bonds from the Mindoro Sugar Co. and resell them while guaranteeing them to third parties. Phil Trust Co. paid interest to the plaintiff until 1928 when it claimed the guarantee was illegal and void. However, the court held that the guarantee was within Phil Trust Co.'s corporate powers. Additionally, having received money through the contract, Phil Trust Co. was estopped from denying liability. Even if the law prohibited guarantees over capital amounts, sufficient assets from Mindoro Sugar Co. were transferred to Phil Trust Co. to secure payment of bond liabilities.

    Original Description:

    CARLOS v. MINDORO SUGAR CO. (57 SCRA 343, 1932) CORPORATION LAW CASE DIGEST

    Original Title

    CARLOS v MINDORO

    Copyright

    © © All Rights Reserved

    Available Formats

    DOC, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    Report this Document
    The Board of Directors of the Phil Trust Co. authorized its president to purchase bonds from the Mindoro Sugar Co. and resell them while guaranteeing them to third parties. Phil Trust Co. paid interest to the plaintiff until 1928 when it claimed the guarantee was illegal and void. However, the court held that the guarantee was within Phil Trust Co.'s corporate powers. Additionally, having received money through the contract, Phil Trust Co. was estopped from denying liability. Even if the law prohibited guarantees over capital amounts, sufficient assets from Mindoro Sugar Co. were transferred to Phil Trust Co. to secure payment of bond liabilities.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOC, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    Download as doc, pdf, or txt
    43 views1 page

    CARLOS V MINDORO

    Uploaded by

    Jan Jason Guerrero Lumanag
    The Board of Directors of the Phil Trust Co. authorized its president to purchase bonds from the Mindoro Sugar Co. and resell them while guaranteeing them to third parties. Phil Trust Co. paid interest to the plaintiff until 1928 when it claimed the guarantee was illegal and void. However, the court held that the guarantee was within Phil Trust Co.'s corporate powers. Additionally, having received money through the contract, Phil Trust Co. was estopped from denying liability. Even if the law prohibited guarantees over capital amounts, sufficient assets from Mindoro Sugar Co. were transferred to Phil Trust Co. to secure payment of bond liabilities.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOC, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    Download as doc, pdf, or txt
    of 1

    CARLOS v. MINDORO SUGAR CO.

    (57 SCRA 343, 1932)


    The BOD of the Phil Trust Co. adopted a resolution which authorized its president to
    purchase at par and in the name of the corp. bonds of MSC. These bonds were later
    resold and guaranteed by PTC to third persons. PTC paid plaintiff the corresponding
    interest payments until July 1, 1928 when it alleged that it is not bound to pay such
    interest or to redeem the obligation because the guarantee given for the bonds was illegal
    and void.
    Held: The act of guaranty by PTC was well within its corporate powers. Furthermore,
    having received money or property by virtue of the contract which is not illegal, it is
    estopped from denying liability. Even if the then prevailing law (Corp. Law) prohibited
    PTC from guaranteeing bonds with a total value in excess of its capital, with all the MSC
    properties transferred to PTC based on the deed of trust, sufficient assets were made
    available to secure the payment of the corresponding liabilities brought about by the
    bonds.

    You might also like