Title
Virata vs. Ng Wee
Case
G.R. No. 220926
Decision Date
Mar 21, 2018
Investor Alejandro Ng Wee sued Wincorp directors for fraud and gross negligence over unauthorized side agreements exonerating Power Merge from Php 2.5B debt. SC upheld liability, piercing corporate veil.
A

Case Digest (G.R. No. 220926)

Facts:

  • Background and Parties Involved
    • Petitioners: Luis Juan L. Virata; UEM-MARA Philippines Corporation (now Cavitex Infrastructure Corporation); Westmont Investment Corporation (Wincorp); Simeon Cua; Vicente and Henry Cualoping; Manuel Estrella; Mariza Santos-Tan; Anthony T. Reyes.
    • Respondents: Alejandro Ng Wee and others.
  • Underlying Transactions and Agreements
    • Wincorp extended a credit line facility to Power Merge in the maximum amount of Php 2,500,000,000.00 in 1999.
    • Power Merge made drawdowns totaling Php 2,183,755,253.11 from this facility despite signs indicating Power Merge might not be able to pay.
    • Power Merge executed promissory notes obliging itself to pay Wincorp or investors.
    • Side Agreements executed by Ong and Reyes with the Credit Line Agreement effectively exonerated Power Merge from liability on these promissory notes. These Side Agreements were not approved by the full Board of Directors of Wincorp and were unknown to some directors.
  • Proceedings below and Interactions Among Parties
    • Virata and Reyes accused Santos-Tan and others as co-parties responsible to Ng Wee.
    • Various motions for reconsideration and petitions were filed by the parties.
    • The Court of Appeals issued decisions holding the directors and officers liable jointly and severally with the corporation.
    • The Supreme Court issued its July 5, 2017 Decision affirming the corporate veil piercing and holding Wincorp directors liable under Section 31 of the Corporation Code.
    • Santos-Tan did not appeal the CA ruling but participated in the Supreme Court proceedings by filing a Motion for Reconsideration claiming lack of jurisdiction and denial of due process.
  • Specific Allegations and Defenses
    • Santos-Tan argued the Court lacked jurisdiction over her person, and the CA ruling was final. She alleged denial of due process for not being able to contest Virata’s cross-claim against her.
    • Petitioners Cua and the Cualopings raised defenses that they acted on screening committee’s recommendations and were unaware of the Side Agreements.
    • Estrella denied participation or knowledge of the credit line approvals, claimed to be a nominee director, and asserted he was absent during approval meetings.
    • Virata consistently pursued cross-claims to be absolved of liability, implicating his co-parties including Santos-Tan.
  • Findings on Board Meetings and Conduct of Directors
    • Minutes of Wincorp’s February 9 and March 11, 1999 special board meetings noted approval of credit line to Power Merge.
    • Proceeds were released to Power Merge before formal execution of Credit Line Agreement and Amendment, indicating tacit understanding outside of formal documents.
    • Directors were found to have been grossly negligent or complicit in fraudulent scheme by approving credit despite warning signs:
      • Power Merge was newly established, thinly capitalized (Php 37,500,000 subscribed capital).
      • Power Merge lacked necessary permits and licenses and did not file SEC reports.
      • No adequate security other than promissory notes was demanded or furnished.
    • The board approved excluding Virata from collection suit on outstanding obligations while simultaneously granting him credit line for Power Merge.

Issues:

  • Jurisdiction and Finality
    • Whether the Supreme Court has jurisdiction over respondent Santos-Tan given her failure to appeal prior CA decisions.
    • Whether the CA’s ruling is final and unmodifiable as to her.
  • Due Process
    • Whether Santos-Tan was denied due process for not being able to rebut Virata's cross-claim against her.
  • Liability of Wincorp and its Directors
    • Whether the directors of Wincorp, including Cua, the Cualopings, Santos-Tan, and Estrella, are personally and solidarily liable with the corporation and other parties to pay Ng Wee.
    • Whether their approval of the Credit Line Agreement to Power Merge amounted to willful and knowing assent to unlawful acts or amounted to gross negligence or bad faith.
    • Whether the separate juridical personality of Wincorp should be pierced to hold the directors personally liable.
  • Validity and Binding Effect of the Side Agreements
    • Whether the Side Agreements, lacking express board approval, can bind Wincorp and its directors.
    • Whether the directors ratified or authorized these Side Agreements, impliedly or otherwise.

Ruling:

  • (Subscriber-Only)

Ratio:

  • (Subscriber-Only)

Doctrine:

  • (Subscriber-Only)

Analyze Cases Smarter, Faster
Jur helps you analyze cases smarter to comprehend faster, building context before diving into full texts. AI-powered analysis, always verify critical details.