G.R. No. 188146 - Pilipinas Shell Petroleum Corp. vs. Royal Ferry Services, Inc.

Organized under Philippine law on October 18, 1996.
Articles of Incorporation list principal office at 2521 A. Bonifacio Street, Bangkal, Makati City.
Actually held office for over six months before filing in Room 203, BF Condominium Bldg., Andres Soriano corner Solano Sts., Intramuros, Manila.

August 28, 2005 – Royal Ferry filed a verified petition for voluntary insolvency in the Regional Trial Court (RTC) of Manila, Branch 24, alleging business losses since 2000, heavy debts, surrender of non-exempt assets, and cessation of operations on February 28, 2002.
December 19, 2005 – RTC Manila issued an Order declaring Royal Ferry insolvent, directed seizure of assets, stayed proceedings against the corporation, and set creditor meeting for February 24, 2006.

December 23, 2005 – Pilipinas Shell filed Formal Notice of Claim and Motion to Dismiss, arguing improper venue: venue should be RTC Makati as per Articles of Incorporation.
January 30, 2006 – RTC Manila denied the motion, holding that Royal Ferry had abandoned its Makati office and moved to Manila, and that assets were seized in Manila premises.
February 24, 2006 – Pilipinas Shell filed motion for reconsideration.
June 15, 2006 – RTC Manila granted reconsideration, held that corporation cannot change its principal office without amending its Articles, and dismissed the insolvency petition.

October 26, 2006 – Royal Ferry filed Notice of Appeal; records forwarded November 7, 2006.
January 30, 2009 – CA Ninth Division Decision reinstated the insolvency orders, set aside the June 15, 2006 dismissal for lack of creditors’ written consent under Section 81 of Act No. 1956, and held RTC Manila had proper venue.
May 26, 2009 – CA denied Pilipinas Shell’s motion for reconsideration.
July 20, 2009 – Pilipinas Shell filed a Petition for Review on Certiorari to the Supreme Court.

August 4, 2015 – Respondent and Pilipinas Shell executed a Compromise Agreement in CA-G.R. CV No. 102522, approving settlement of claims against Royal Ferry officers (the Gascons) but not expressly releasing the corporation.
CA Judgment in CV No. 102522 approved the Compromise Agreement, closed and terminated that case.
April 29, 2016 – Respondent moved to dismiss the present petition as moot and academic in light of the Compromise Agreement; Pilipinas Shell opposed.

Whether the petition is rendered moot and academic by the Compromise Agreement of August 4, 2015.

Whether the Court of Appeals erred in taking cognizance of Royal Ferry’s appeal despite alleged non-compliance with Rule 44, Section 13, paragraphs (a), (c), (d), (e), (f), and (h) of the Rules of Court.

Whether the petition for voluntary insolvency was properly filed before the RTC of Manila, given Royal Ferry’s stated Articles address in Makati and actual office in Manila.