This case has been cited 3 times or more.
|
2009-04-16 |
CHICO-NAZARIO, J. |
||||
| The issue raised by Atty. Garcia - whether the termination or removal of an officer of a corporation is an intra-corporate controversy that falls under the original exclusive jurisdiction of the regional trial courts - is not novel. The Supreme Court, in a long line of cases, has decreed that a corporate officer's dismissal or removal is always a corporate act and/or an intra-corporate controversy, over which the Securities and Exchange Commission [SEC] (now the Regional Trial Court)[87] has original and exclusive jurisdiction.[88] | |||||
|
2007-03-01 |
AUSTRIA-MARTINEZ, J. |
||||
| a corporation's board of directors is understood to be that body which (1) exercises all powers provided for under the Corporation Code; (2) conducts all business of the corporation; and (3) controls and holds all property of the corporation. Its members have been characterized as trustees or directors clothed with a fiduciary character. [12] Moreover, the directors may appoint officers and agents and as incident to this power of appointment, they may discharge those appointed.[13] | |||||
|
2006-12-06 |
AUSTRIA-MARTINEZ, J. |
||||
| Under Section 25 of the Corporation Code, three officers are specifically provided for which a corporation must have: president, secretary, and treasurer. The law, however, does not limit corporate officers to these three. Section 25 gives corporations the widest latitude to provide for such other offices, as they may deem necessary. The by-laws may and usually do provide for such other officers, e.g., vice-president, cashier, auditor, and general manager.[17] | |||||