This case has been cited 2 times or more.
|
2010-08-10 |
LEONARDO-DE CASTRO, J. |
||||
| In legal parlance, however, human beings are never embraced in the term "assets and liabilities." Moreover, BPI's absorption of former FEBTC employees was neither by operation of law nor by legal consequence of contract. There was no government regulation or law that compelled the merger of the two banks or the absorption of the employees of the dissolved corporation by the surviving corporation. Had there been such law or regulation, the absorption of employees of the non-surviving entities of the merger would have been mandatory on the surviving corporation.[27] In the present case, the merger was voluntarily entered into by both banks presumably for some mutually acceptable consideration. In fact, the Corporation Code does not also mandate the absorption of the employees of the non-surviving corporation by the surviving corporation in the case of a merger. Section 80 of the Corporation Code provides: SEC. 80. Effects of merger or consolidation. - The merger or consolidation, as provided in the preceding sections shall have the following effects: | |||||
|
2009-10-30 |
ABAD, J. |
||||
| Petitioner company filed a petition for certiorari with the Court of Appeals,[21] assailing the order of the BLR. But the latter court dismissed the petition, not being accompanied by material documents and portions of the record.[22] The company filed a motion for reconsideration, attaching parts of the record that were deemed indispensable but the court denied it for lack of merit.[23] Hence, the company filed this petition for review under Rule 45. | |||||