This case has been cited 2 times or more.
|
2015-07-29 |
BERSAMIN, J. |
||||
| x x x the paper representative or tangible evidence of the stock itself and of the various interests therein. The certificate is not stock in the corporation but is merely evidence of the holder's interest and status in the corporation, his ownership of the share represented thereby, but is not in law the equivalent of such ownership. It expresses the contract between the corporation and the stockholder, but it is not essential to the existence of a share in stock or the creation of the relation of shareholder to the corporation.[29] (Emphasis supplied.) | |||||
|
2013-03-20 |
SERENO, C.J. |
||||
| As worded, Rule 17, Section 3 of the Rules of Court, provides that the court may dismiss a complaint in case there are no justifiable reasons that explain the plaintiff's absence during the presentation of the evidence in chief. Generally speaking, the use of "may" denotes its directory nature,[20] especially if used in remedial statutes that are known to be construed liberally. Thus, the word "may" in Rule 17, Section 3 of the Rules of Court, operates to confer on the court the discretion[21] to decide between the dismissal of the case on technicality vis-à-vis the progressive prosecution thereof. | |||||