Title
Supreme Court
Batangas Laguna Tayabas Bus Company, Inc. vs. Bitanga
Case
G.R. No. 137934
Decision Date
Aug 10, 2001
A corporate dispute over BLTB shares between Potenciano and Bitanga groups, involving contested stockholders' meetings, SEC injunctions, and corporate law principles on share transfers and voting rights.

Case Summary (G.R. No. 137934)

Sale and Purchase Agreement

On October 28, 1997, the Potenciano family entered into a Sale and Purchase Agreement with BMB Property Holdings, Inc., represented by Benjamin Bitanga. The Potencianos sold 21,071,114 shares, representing 47.98% of BLTB's capital stock, for P72,076,425. The agreement specified payment terms, including an immediate downpayment and conditions regarding the delivery of certain documentation facilitating the sale.

Election of Directors and Shareholders' Meetings

Subsequent to the transaction, the Bitanga group was elected to the board of BLTB in late 1997, replacing several of the Potenciano family members. Tensions escalated, leading to contested stockholders' meetings and a conflict regarding the legitimacy of those meetings. Particularly contentious was the May 19, 1998 meeting, where the Potenciano family, allegedly holding a majority of shares, sought to reclaim control.

SEC Complaints and Legal Proceedings

In the wake of continuing disputes, both parties filed complaints with the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC). The Bitanga group initially sought damages and an injunction against the Potencianos, while the latter sought to stop the Bitanga group from claiming board authority, resulting in competing SEC cases.

SEC Hearing and Rulings

Following hearings, the SEC issued a temporary restraining order halting the Bitanga group’s actions as officers and directors. The SEC found merit in the Potencianos' claims regarding the legitimacy of the May 19 meeting, based on issues including the proper notification for the meeting and allegations of quorum requirements not being met.

Court of Appeals' Decision

The Court of Appeals later reversed the SEC's decision, asserting that proper procedures were not observed and that due process rights of the Bitanga group were violated. This judgment led to appeals by both the Potencianos and the SEC En Banc, challenging the Court of Appeals' findings and seeking reinstatement of the SEC's orders.

Supreme Court's Analysis

The Supreme Court reviewed the decisions, focusing on the due process claims made by the Bitanga group. The Court asserted that both parties had ample opportunity to present their cases, making due process claims unfounded. It was underscored that the SEC’s involvement was appropriate and within

...continue reading

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.