Title
Boyer-Roxas vs. Court of Appeals
Case
G.R. No. 100866
Decision Date
Jul 14, 1992
Petitioners, heirs of Eugenia V. Roxas, claimed co-ownership of corporate property but were ordered to vacate. Court upheld corporate separateness, denied due process claim, and applied Article 448 for unfinished building.

Case Summary (G.R. No. L-44059)

Petition and Procedural History

• Two ejectment actions (RTC Civil Case Nos. 802-84-C and 803-84-C) filed by the corporation before the Regional Trial Court of Laguna, Branch 37, to recover possession and rent from petitioners.
• RTC ordered petitioners to vacate, pay monthly rentals, and remove an unfinished building (Rebecca) within ninety days.
• Court of Appeals affirmed; motion for reconsideration denied.
• Supreme Court review granted under the 1987 Philippine Constitution.

Assignment I – Piercing the Corporate Veil

• Petitioners contend co-ownership of corporate capital justifies occupancy and urges disregard of corporate personality.
• Supreme Court affirms corporate fiction: the corporation has a juridical personality separate from its stockholders.
• Registered title and improvements belong to the corporation; stock ownership merely represents an aliquot share of corporate assets.
• No evidence of fraud, injustice, or creditor protection requiring veil piercing.

Assignment II – Due Process and Counsel’s Neglect

• Petitioners argue gross negligence of counsel deprived them of their day in court.
• Records show multiple notices of hearings and clear warnings that failure to appear would result in submission of cases for decision.
• Petitioners and counsel repeatedly missed scheduled hearings despite actual receipt of notices.
• Supreme Court upholds that the client is bound by counsel’s omissions absent extraordinary circumstances; no deprivation of due process.

Assignment III – Builder in Good Faith and Unfinished Building

• Rebecca Boyer-Roxas financed construction of an unfinished building on corporate land with corporate knowledge but without an explicit contract.
• Under Articles 448 and 453 of the Civil Code, a good-faith builder on another’s land is entitled to either:
– Indemnity for improvements if the owner appropriates the building, or
– Reasonable rent or the option to pay for



...continue reading

Analyze Cases Smarter, Faster
Jur is a legal research platform serving the Philippines with case digests and jurisprudence resources.