HOME LAW NOTES + PH ELECTIONS + CASE DIGESTS + TRAVEL GAMES + TOYS

LAW TECH WORLD

Law, Technology and the World

CASE DIGEST: CHIANG KAI SHEK SCHOOL, PETITIONER, VS. COURT OF APPEALS
AND FAUSTINA FRANCO OH, RESPONDENTS.
Published by charmon on July 21, 2013 | Leave a response

CHIANG KAI SHEK SCHOOL, petitioner,

VS

COURT OF APPEALS and FAUSTINA FRANCO OH, respondents.

G.R. No. L-58028 [April 18, 1989]

Facts:

Fausta F. Oh had been teaching in the Chiang Kai Shek School since 1932 for a
continuous period of almost 33 years. She was told she had no assignment for the next
semester. For no apparent or given reason, she was dismissed from her work. As a result, she
sued and demanded separation pay, social security benefits, salary differentials, maternity
benefits and moral and exemplary damages. The original defendant was the Chiang Kai Shek
School but when it filed a motion to dismiss on the ground that it could not be sued, the
complaint was amended. Certain officials of the school were also impleaded to make them
solidarily liable with the school.

The Court of First Instance of Sorsogon dismissed the complaint. On appeal, its
decision was set aside by the respondent court, which held the school suable and liable while
absolving the other defendants. The motion for reconsideration having been denied, the
school then came to this Court in this petition for review on certiorari.

Issue:

Whether or not a school that has not been incorporated may be sued by reason
alone of its long continued existence and recognition by the government

Ruling:

As a school, the petitioner was governed by Act No. 2706 as amended by C.A. No. 180,
which provided as follows: Unless exempted for special reasons by the Secretary of Public
Instruction, any private school or college recognized by the government shall be incorporated
under the provisions of Act No. 1459 known as the Corporation Law, within 90 days after the
date of recognition, and shall file with the Secretary of Public Instruction a copy of its
incorporation papers and by-laws.Having been recognized by the government, it was under
obligation to incorporate under the Corporation Law within 90 days from such recognition. It
appears that it had not done so at the time the complaint was filed notwithstanding that it had
been in existence even earlier than 1932. The petitioner cannot now invoke its own non-
compliance with the law to immunize it from the private respondent’s complaint. There
should also be no question that having contracted with the private respondent every year for
thirty two years and thus represented itself as possessed of juridical personality to do so, the
petitioner is now estopped from denying such personality to defeat her claim against it.
According to Article 1431 of the Civil Code, “through estoppel an admission or representation is
rendered conclusive upon the person making it and cannot be denied or disproved as against
the person relying on it.” As the school itself may be sued in its own name, there is no need to
apply Rule 3, Section 15, under which the persons joined in an association without any
juridical personality may be sued with such association. Besides, it has been shown that the
individual members of the board of trustees are not liable, having been appointed only after
the private respondent’s dismissal.

Papers Salary Articl Be Incorporated Been Incorporated

RELATED ARTICLES:

CASE DIGEST: Antonio Banzon VS Court of Appeals

CASE DIGEST: AFIALDA VS HISOLE

Case Digest: AGAPITO FUELLAS vs. ELPIDIO CADANO, ET AL.

CASE DIGEST: AGUSTIN VS CA AND LABRADOR DEVELOPMENT

CORPORATION

CASE DIGEST: Celso Amarante, et. al. VS Court of Appeals, et. al.

CASE DIGEST: CASIÑO JR. VS CA

Share this:

Posted in Case Digest

LEAVE A REPLY

Comment

Name * Email *

Website

POST COMMENT

← PREVIOUS NEXT →

SEARCH

Law Tech World

513 likes

Like Page

Be the first of your friends to like this

POPULAR POSTS

Pokemon Revolution: How to Get to Giovanni in Silph Co Maze (23,526)

Pokemon Revolution: Eevee Mission at Game Corner Guide (13,903)
2014 Case Digest: Arigo v. Swift (7,437)
Pokemon Revolution: How to Get to Articuno in Seafoam Island (6,952)
2015 Case Digest: Diocese of Bacolod v. COMELEC (5,918)
2015 Case Digest: Kalaw v. Fernandez (MR) (4,982)
2014 Case Digest: Sameer Overseas Placement Agency v.… (4,913)
Pokemon Revolution: Cinnabar Mansion Guide (4,444)
 Case Digest: PCGG V SANDIGANBAYAN (3,580)
Case Digest: FLORES V DRILON (3,098)

This work by Law Tech World is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0
International License.

Live Traffic Feed

A visitor from United States
viewed "White Collar Season 4
Spoiler: Emily Procter as Amanda
Callaway- TV Cebu,
A visitor from Series Cebu
Lounge"
City10
secs ago"CASE DIGEST:
viewed
CHIANG KAI SHEK SCHOOL,
petitioner, vs. COURT OF
APPEALS
A visitor from
andCebu,
FAUSTINA
Cebu City
FRANCO
viewed "2015
OH,Case
respondents."
Digest: 25
secs agov. Aquino (MR)" 1 min
Araullo
A visitor from Makati, Mindoro
ago
Occidental viewed "2014 Case
Digest: People v. Jumawan" 3
mins ago from Philippines viewed
A visitor
"Case Digest: J.L.T. AGRO, INC.
v. BALANSAG" 3 mins ago
A visitor from Sucat, Rizal
viewed "Case Digest: GREGO V
COMELEC" 3 mins ago
A visitor from Hanoi, Ha Noi
viewed "Pokemon Revolution:
How to Get to Giovanni in Silph
Co Maze"from
A visitor 5 mins ago View,
Mountain
California viewed "Case Digest:
PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES
v. SALVADOR GOLIMLIM 427
SCRA
A visitor 15from
(2004)" Philippines
6 mins ago
viewed
"Case Digest: DIÑO V. DIÑO" 9
mins ago
A visitor from Philippines viewed
"Case Digest: American Airlines
v. CA" 9 mins ago
Real-time view · Get Feedjit
 HOME LAW NOTES +

PH ELECTIONS +

CASE DIGESTS + TRAVEL

GAMES + TOYS

LAW TECH WORLD

Law, Technology and the
World

CASE DIGEST: CHIANG

KAI SHEK SCHOOL,
PETITIONER, VS. COURT
OF APPEALS AND
FAUSTINA FRANCO OH,
RESPONDENTS.
Published by charmon on July
21, 2013 | Leave a response

CHIANG KAI SHEK

Privacy Policy

Copyright © 2017 Law Tech World.

Powered by WordPress and Live Wire.