Case Digest (G.R. No. 95026)
Facts:
Petitioner Eriks Pte. Ltd. is a non-resident foreign corporation duly organized under Singapore law with headquarters at 18 Pasir Panjang Road, #09-01 PSA Multi-Storey Complex, Singapore. It was not licensed to do business in the Philippines. Between January 17 and August 16, 1989, Eriks sold industrial sealing pump elements, valves, PVC pipes and fittings to respondent Delfin F. Enriquez, Jr., doing business as Delrene EB Controls Center and/or EB Karmine Commercial, under 17 separate invoices dispatched F.O.B. Singapore on uniform 90-day credit terms, amounting to S$41,927.43. Despite repeated demands, Enriquez failed and refused to pay. On August 28, 1991, Eriks filed Civil Case No. 91-2373 in the Regional Trial Court of Makati, Branch 138, seeking recovery of S$41,939.63 or its peso equivalent, plus interest and damages. Enriquez moved to dismiss for lack of capacity to sue, arguing that Eriks was doing business in the Philippines without a license. On March 8, 1993, the triCase Digest (G.R. No. 95026)
Facts:
- Parties and Background
- Petitioner Eriks Pte. Ltd. is a foreign corporation organized under Singapore law, manufacturing and selling industrial sealing‐pump elements, valves, control equipment, and PVC pipes and fittings. It is not licensed to do business in the Philippines.
- Respondent Delfin F. Enriquez, Jr. is a Filipino businessman operating as Delrene EB Controls Center and/or EB Karmine Commercial.
- Sales Transactions
- Between January 17 and August 16, 1989, petitioner sold goods to respondent under sixteen separate invoices, delivered F.O.B. Singapore, aggregating S$41,927.43, on 90-day credit terms.
- Deliveries were made via airfreight or self-collect; petitioner repeatedly demanded payment, which respondent did not make.
- Judicial Proceedings
- On August 28, 1991, petitioner filed Civil Case No. 91-2373 with RTC Makati, Branch 138, seeking recovery of S$41,939.63 (plus interest and damages). Respondent moved to dismiss for lack of capacity to sue (no business license).
- On March 8, 1993, the RTC granted the motion and dismissed the complaint, holding petitioner was doing business without a license.
- On January 25, 1995, the Court of Appeals (Seventh Division) affirmed the dismissal, ruling the sales were not isolated transactions and petitioner lacked capacity to sue.
- Petitioner then filed a petition for review (G.R. No. 118843) before the Supreme Court.
Issues:
- Capacity to Sue
- Whether a foreign corporation transacting business in the Philippines without a license is barred from maintaining an action in Philippine courts under Corporation Code Sec. 133.
- Whether the sequence of sixteen transactions over five months qualifies as “isolated transactions,” thus exempting petitioner from the licensing requirement.
Ruling:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Ratio:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Doctrine:
- (Subscriber-Only)