Samahan Ng Optometrists Sa Pilipinas

v.
Acebedo International Corporation
G.R. No. 117097,
March 21, 1997

Facts:

Respondent applied for a permit to operate a branch of Acebedo Optical in a certain

municipality but this was opposed by the petitioners contending that a juridical person is not
qualified to practice optometry. Respondent on its part argues that the hiring of optometrists r
is merely incidental to its main business which is the sale of optical products. It contends
further that its employees have a personality separate and distinct from that of Acebedo
International Inc., which is a juridical entity, and it cannot therefore be considered as engaged
in optometry.

Issue: Whether or not Acebedo International Inc., as a juridical person engages in the practice
of optometry.

Ruling: No.

A corporation created and organized for the purpose of conducting the business of
selling optical lenses or eyeglasses is not engaged in the practice of optometry because the
determination of the proper lenses to sell to the clients entails the employment of optometrists
who have been precisely trained for that purpose.

In this case, the fact that private respondent hires optometrists who practice their
profession in the course of their employment in private respondent's optical shops, does not
translate into a practice of optometry by private respondent itself. Private respondent's
business, rather, is the buying and importing of eyeglasses and lenses and other similar or allied
instruments from suppliers thereof and selling the same to consumers. There is no law that
prohibits the hiring by corporations of optometrists or considers the hiring by corporations of
optometrists as a practice by the corporation itself of the profession of optometry.
NOTE: In a similar case, Acebedo Optical Company v. CA, et al., G.R. No. 100152 (2000), the SC
cited the Samahang Case and ruled: “The employment of a qualified optometrist by a
corporation is not against public policy. Unless prohibited by statutes, a corporation has all the
contractual rights that an individual has and it does not become the practice of medicine or
optometry because of the presence of a physician or optometrist. The manufacturing, selling,
trading and bartering of eyeglasses and spectacles as articles of merchandise do not constitute
the practice of optometry.”