Title
Supreme Court
Philippine National Bank vs. Hydro Resources Contractors Corp.
Case
G.R. No. 167530
Decision Date
Mar 13, 2013
DBP and PNB formed NMIC, which defaulted on a contract with Hercon (later HRCC). HRCC sued, seeking to pierce NMIC's corporate veil to hold DBP, PNB, and APT liable. SC ruled NMIC had separate juridical personality; no evidence justified piercing the veil. APT, as trustee, was not liable but must ensure compliance.

Case Digest (G.R. No. L-44061)
Expanded Legal Reasoning Model

Facts:

  • Background and formation of NMIC
    • In 1984, the Development Bank of the Philippines (DBP) and the Philippine National Bank (PNB) foreclosed on Marinduque Mining and Industrial Corporation (MMIC) mortgages, acquired its assets, and organized Nonoc Mining and Industrial Corporation (NMIC) (DBP 57%, PNB 43%, plus five qualifying shares).
    • NMIC’s board of directors comprised nominees of DBP and PNB.
  • Contract with Hercon, Inc. and acquisition by HRCC
    • In 1985, NMIC engaged Hercon, Inc. for a mine‐stripping and road construction program (contract price ₱35,770,120). After credits and payments, NMIC owed ₱8,370,934.74.
    • Hercon made formal demands; upon nonpayment, it filed Civil Case No. 15375 in RTC Makati Branch 136. Hercon merged into Hydro Resources Contractors Corporation (HRCC), which was substituted as plaintiff.
  • Transfers under Proclamation No. 50 and impleading of APT
    • Proclamation No. 50 (Dec. 8, 1986) created the Asset Privatization Trust (APT). On Feb. 27, 1987, DBP and PNB transferred their NMIC stakes and liabilities to the National Government, which in turn transferred them to APT as trustee.
    • HRCC amended its complaint to implead APT as a defendant, alleging solidary liability with NMIC’s stockholders.
  • Trial court and Court of Appeals decisions
    • RTC Makati (Nov. 6, 1995) pierced NMIC’s corporate veil, holding DBP and PNB solidarily liable for NMIC’s unpaid ₱8,370,934.74 plus interest and 25% attorney’s fees; dismissed APT but directed it, as trustee, to ensure compliance.
    • CA (Nov. 30, 2004) affirmed piercing, held APT (succeeded by the Privatization and Management Office) solidarily liable, deleted attorney’s fees, and denied motions for reconsideration by PNB, DBP, and APT.

Issues:

  • Whether the corporate veil of NMIC may be pierced to hold DBP and PNB solidarily liable for NMIC’s debt to HRCC.
  • Whether APT, as successor‐in‐interest under Proclamation No. 50 and the deeds of transfer, assumed DBP’s and PNB’s liabilities to HRCC.

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.