Title
Government of the Philippine Islands vs. Springer
Case
G.R. No. 26979
Decision Date
Apr 1, 1927
Quo warranto case challenging the constitutionality of a committee's voting power over government-owned stock in a private corporation, involving separation of powers and executive authority.

Case Digest (G.R. No. 26979)
Expanded Legal Reasoning Model

Facts:

  • Corporate Charter and Government Stock
    • Acts No. 2705 (1917) and 2822 (1919) created the National Coal Company, capitalized at ₱3 million, stock divided into 30,000 shares.
    • Charter directed the Governor-General to subscribe for at least 51 percent; the Government ultimately acquired over 99 percent (29,981 of 30,000 shares).
    • Section 4, as amended, vested the Government’s voting power “exclusively in a committee consisting of the Governor-General, the President of the Senate, and the Speaker of the House of Representatives.”
  • Executive Order No. 37
    • November 9, 1926: Gov-Gen promulgated E.O. 37, citing U.S. Army Judge Advocate General and U.S. Acting Attorney-General opinions that voting committees created by local statute were nullities and that their functions were executive.
    • E.O. 37 directed that the Governor-General thereafter exercise all duties and powers formerly vested in such committees.
  • Stockholders’ Special Meeting and Dual Slates
    • December 6, 1926, 2:30 p.m.: President of the Senate and Speaker of the House met as “committee” and resolved to vote Government stock for five nominees (including defendants Springer, Costas, Hilario).
    • December 6, 1926, 3 p.m.: At the stockholders’ meeting, Gov-Gen’s representative asserted exclusive voting power and cast a different ballot for five nominees (including Agcaoili, Heath, Lagdameo).
    • The chair recognized the Senate President/Speaker ballot as valid; Gov-Gen’s protest was overruled; the five named by the legislative officers were declared elected.
  • Quo Warranto Proceeding
    • Government filed an original quo warranto action to test the validity of the legislative members’ participation in the committee and to oust defendants from directorships.
    • Defendants demurred, admitting the material facts.

Issues:

  • Separation of Powers
    • Does vesting executive functions in legislative officers violate the Organic Act’s tripartite division of powers?
    • Can legislative members sit as “voting committee” members for Government-owned stock?
  • Executive Order No. 37
    • Was the Governor-General authorized by the Organic Act or local law to annul the committee provision and assume exclusive voting power?
  • Election of Directors
    • Which slate—legislative officers’ or Governor-General’s—legally elected the directors?

Ruling:

  • (Subscriber-Only)

Ratio:

  • (Subscriber-Only)

Doctrine:

  • (Subscriber-Only)

Analyze Cases Smarter, Faster
Jur is a legal research platform serving the Philippines with case digests and jurisprudence resources. AI digests are study aids only—use responsibly.