FACILITIES MANAGEMENT

CORPORATION vs. DE LA OSA

DOCTRINE:
A foreign corporation not doing
business
in the Philippines may be sued here for
acts done against persons in the
Philippines.
If a foreign corporation, not engaged
in
business in the Philippines, is not
banned
from seeking redress from courts in
the
Philippines, then that same
corporation
cannot claim exemption from being
sued
in Philippine courts for acts done
against
a person or persons in the Philippines.
HOME INSURANCE COMPANY vs.
EASTERN SHIPPING LINES
DOCTRINE:
Whether a foreign corporation doing
business in the Philippines initially
without a license can claim indemnity
through Philippine Courts. The
objective
of the law was to subject the foreign
corporation to the jurisdiction of our
courts. The Corporation Law must be
given a reasonable, not an unduly
harsh,
interpretation which does not hamper
the
development of trade relations and
which fosters friendly commercial
intercourse among countries
THE MENTHOLATUM CO., INC.
vs. ANACLETO MANGALIMAN
DOCTRINE:
No general rule or governing principles

can "be laid down as to what

constitutes
"doing" or "engaging in" or
"transacting"
business. Indeed, each case must be
judged in the light of its peculiar
environmental circumstances. The
true
test, however, seems to be whether
the
foreign corporation is continuing the
body or substance of the business or
enterprise for which it was organized
or
whether it has substantially retired
from
it and turned it over to another. The
term
implies a continuity of commercial
dealings and arrangements, and
contemplates. to that extent, the
performance of acts or works or the
exercise of some of the functions
normally incident to, and in
progressive
prosecution of, the purpose and object
of
its organization.
ERIKS PTE. LTD.vs. COURT OF
APPEALS and DELFIN F.
ENRIQUEZ, JR.
DOCTRINE:
Section 133 of the Corporation Code
prohibits not merely the absence of
the
prescribed license, but it also bars a
foreign corporation doing business
in
the Philippines without such license
access to our courts. A foreign
corporation without such license is not
ipso facto incapacitated from bringing
an
action. A license is necessary only if it
is
transacting or doing business in the
country.

MR HOLDINGS vs. SHERIFF

BAJAR
DOCTRINE:
Doing" or "transacting" business in
the
Philippines implies a continuity of
commercial dealings and
arrangements,
and contemplates, to that extent, the
performance of acts or works or the
exercise of some of the functions
normally incident to, and in
progressive
prosecution of, the purpose and object
for which the corporation was
organized.

HUTCHINSON PORTS
PHILIPPINES LIMITED vs. SUBIC
BAY METROPLITAN AUTHORITY
DOCTRINE:
A foreign corporation seeking to do
business in the Philippines must first
obtain the necessary license.
Otherwise,
the said corporation may not seek
redress
from Philippine courts but may
nevertheless be sued in transactions
committed inside the country.
ANTAM CONSOLIDATED INC. vs.
COURT OF APPEALS
DOCTRINE:
A foreign corporation doing business in
the Philippines is required to obtain a
license to maintain a suit in Philippine
courts. However, the requirement of a
license is not necessary for it to have
the

capacity to sue when it is not engaged

or
doing business in the Philippines. The
true test to determine whether the
foreign
corporation is engaged in business is
in
the continuity of its commercial
dealings
and arrangements, to the extent that
the
performance of these acts are in
furtherance of its business or purpose.
MERRILL LYNCH FUTURES, INC.
vs. HON. COURT OF APPEALS,
DOCTRINE:
The general rule that in the absence of
fraud of person who has contracted or
otherwise dealt with an association in
such a way as to recognize and in
effect
admit its legal existence as a
corporate
body is thereby estopped to deny its
corporate existence in any action
leading
out of or involving such contract or
dealing, unless its existence is
attacked
for causes which have arisen since
making the contract or other dealing
relied on as an estoppel and this
applies
to foreign as well as domestic
corporations.
EXPERT TRAVEL AND TOURS vs.
COURT OF APPEALS
DOCTRINE:
The authority of the resident agent of
a
foreign corporation with license to do
business in the Philippines is limited
only to receive, for and in behalf of the
foreign corporation, services and other
legal processes in all actions and other
legal proceedings against such

corporation.