We understand that registered activity of 

Fichtner’s branch office is “providing consulting services,

planning, commissioning and personnel training and/or limited management, for projects and
installations in energy- and, including other processes and services, without engaging in the practice of
profession regulated by the Professional Regulation Commission.”

We note that under the Civil Engineering Law, the practice of civil engineering includes “services in the
form of consultation, design, preparation of plans, specifications, estimates, erection, installation
and supervision of the construction of streets, bridges, highways, railroads, airports and hangars, port
works, canals, river and shore improvements, lighthouses, and dry docks; buildings, fixed structures for
irrigation, flood protection, drainage, water supply and sewerage works; demolition of permanent
structures; and tunnels.” If Fichtner, through its personnel, were to engage in the supervision of
construction projects on-site (in Philippine) soil, this would constitute practice of profession regulated by
the Professional Regulation Commission (PRC) and thus Fitchner itself has to be duly licensed by the PRC
(even if it has personnel who are licensed by PRC).

The SEC has opined that a duly licensed engineer can be hired as an employee in a corporation engaged
in another line of business (e.g., construction company) to render his service. However, such hiring
should only be “incidental to carry out the corporate purposes” of the corporation. Conversely, the SEC
explained that a corporation cannot hire architects or engineers to carry on the business of the practice
of architecture or engineering as “the same would constitute ‘practice of profession’ which cannot be
legally performed by a corporate entity.” (SEC Opinion dated April 25, 1996 addressed to Atalier
PACIFICA, International).

Can you add to that research a little by checking if a Branch Office (i.e. 100% foreign owned) could get a
PRC licence.
Before we looked into PCAP but the below is a slightly different ankle.

Can you also see if you can get the SEC decision/opinion that SyCip cites below.