Title
Grace Christian High School vs. Court of Appeals
Case
G.R. No. 108905
Decision Date
Oct 23, 1997
A school sought a permanent board seat in an association, claiming vested rights from 15 years of practice. The Supreme Court ruled against it, stating past practice cannot override law, amendments require formal approval, and directors must be elected.

Case Summary (G.R. No. 108905)

Key Dates

– By-laws initially registered January 16, 1969 (adopted December 17, 1968)
– Proposed by-law amendment drafted December 20, 1975
– Notice of re-examination of petitioner’s directorship February 13, 1990
– HIGC hearing officer decision June 20, 1990; appeals board resolution September 13, 1990
– Court of Appeals decision February 9, 1993
– Supreme Court decision October 23, 1997

Applicable Law

– 1987 Philippine Constitution (post-1990 benchmark)
– Corporation Code (Batas Pambansa Blg. 68, effective May 1, 1980)
– Revised Corporation Law (Act No. 1459) provisions on election and amendment of by-laws
– Registered by-laws of the association (Articles IV and XIX)

Procedural History

Petitioner sought a writ of mandamus from the Home Insurance and Guaranty Corporation (HIGC) to compel recognition of its representative as a permanent, unelected director. The hearing officer and HIGC appeals board dismissed the action. The Court of Appeals affirmed. Petitioner then elevated the case to the Supreme Court.

Factual Background

Under the 1968 by-laws (Article IV), members were to elect eleven directors annually by plurality vote. In 1975 a board-appointed committee drafted an amendment designating the fourteen highest-vote-getting candidates plus the “Grace Christian High School representative” as a permanent director (Article VI). The amendment was never ratified by the general membership or filed with the SEC. Nevertheless, petitioner’s representative sat on the board from 1975 through 1989.

Triggering Event and Petition

On February 13, 1990, the association’s election committee notified petitioner that automatic inclusion of an unelected director was undemocratic and contrary to the right of members to vote. The committee resolved to observe the 1968 by-laws for the upcoming elections. Petitioner’s request to revert to past practice was denied, prompting the mandamus petition.

Petitioner's Contentions

  1. A vested right had accrued to a permanent board seat through fifteen years of practice.
  2. The 1975 amended by-laws were valid and binding despite lack of formal ratification.
  3. No law prohibits a non-stock corporation from designating an unelected, ex officio director.

Respondents' Defenses and SEC Opinion

Respondents argued the proposed amendments were never approved by members nor by any competent authority (SEC or HIGC) and thus were not part of the registered by-laws. They cited an SEC opinion holding that unelected directors contravene both the existing by-laws and Section 23 of the Corporation Code (formerly A92 of B.P. Blg. 68).

HIGC and Appeals Board Rulings

The hearing officer concluded that the 1975 draft amendments remained mere proposals, void for lack of member ratification and proper registration. He rejected any vested right arising from past tolerance. The HIGC appeals board affirmed, noting that members could nominate as many representatives as they wished but that the long-standing practice lacked legal basis.

Court of Appeals Decision

The appellate court held that amendment of by-laws required majority approval at a regular or special meeting as prescribed by Article XIX of the by-laws and A22 of Act No. 1459. The 1975 draft had never obtained the necessary member vote and hence was invalid.

Supreme Court Issue

Whether petitioner’s representative had a lawful, permanent right to an unelected directorship by virtue of the unratified 1975 draft amendment and fifteen years of acquiescence.

Supreme Court Ruling and Reasoning

  1. By-law amendments not ratified by a majority of members and not filed with the

...continue reading

Analyze Cases Smarter, Faster
Jur helps you analyze cases smarter to comprehend faster—building context before diving into full texts.