Professional Documents
Culture Documents
21 Puyat Vs de Guzman
21 Puyat Vs de Guzman
*
No. L-51122. March 25, 1982.
_______________
* EN BANC.
32
33
the avowed purpose, that is, to enable him eventually to vote and
to be elected as Director in the event of an unfavorable outcome of
the SEC Case would be pure naivete. He would still appear as
counsel indirectly.
Barredo, J.:
I reserve my vote.
PETITION for certiorari and prohibition with
preliminary injunction to review the order of the
Commissioner of the Security and Exchange Commission.
The facts are stated in the opinion of the Court.
MELENCIO-HERRERA, J.:
made:
a) May 14, 1979. An election for the eleven Directors of
the International Pipe Industries Corporation (IPI) a
private corporation, was held. Those in charge ruled that
the following were elected as Directors:
34
http://www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/0000015f448f76bce8458c5b003600fb002c009e/t/?o=False 3/8
22/10/2017 SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED VOLUME 113
_______________
1 p. 23, Rollo.
35
“SEC. 11.
No Member of the Batasang Pambansa shall appear as counsel
before any court without appellate jurisdiction.
before any court in any civil case wherein the Government, or
any subdivision, agency, or instrumentality thereof is the adverse
party,
or in any criminal case wherein any officer or employee of the
Government is accused of an offense committed in relation to his
office,
or before any administrative body.
Neither shall he, directly or indirectly be interested financially
in any contract with, or in any franchise or special privilege
granted by the Government, or any subdivision, agency or
instrumentality
36
_______________
2 p. 6, ibid.
37
No costs.
SO ORDERED.
_______________
3 Am. Digest, 2d Dicennial Ed., Vol. 5, citing Atkinson vs. Board, etc.,
108 P. 1046.
38
39
http://www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/0000015f448f76bce8458c5b003600fb002c009e/t/?o=False 7/8
22/10/2017 SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED VOLUME 113
plied for the receivership; and, a fortiori, the mere fact that
one is a Solicitor or practicing barrister being in no way
connected with the particular parties or subject matter,
does not disqualify him to be receiver. (Cochingyan, Jr. vs.
Cloribel, 76 SCRA 361.)
——o0o——
http://www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/0000015f448f76bce8458c5b003600fb002c009e/t/?o=False 8/8