Title
Supreme Court
Loyola Grand Villas Homeowners Association, Inc. vs. Court of Appeals
Case
G.R. No. 117188
Decision Date
Aug 7, 1997
LGVHAI, sole homeowners' association for Loyola Grand Villas, retained its status despite failing to file by-laws on time; competing associations' registrations revoked by HIGC, upheld by courts.

Case Summary (G.R. No. 117188)

Facts

  1. LGVHAI was duly registered under Certificate of Registration No. 04-197 but did not file its by-laws within one month of incorporation as required by Section 46 of the Corporation Code.
  2. In 1988–1989, two new associations (North and South) each submitted by-laws and secured separate certificates of registration covering different phases of the subdivision.
  3. HIGC informed LGVHAI that its charter had been automatically dissolved for (a) failure to file by-laws on time and (b) non-user of its corporate charter.
  4. LGVHAI filed a complaint with HIGC; after notice and hearing, an HIGC hearing officer recognized LGVHAI as the sole registered homeowners’ association and revoked North and South certificates.
  5. The HIGC Appeals Board and subsequently the Court of Appeals affirmed this ruling, holding that LGVHAI’s corporate existence continued.

Issue

Does a corporation’s failure to file its by-laws within one month of notice of incorporation under Section 46 of the Corporation Code result in its automatic dissolution?

Court of Appeals’ Ruling

  • A corporation’s juridical personality begins upon issuance of its certificate of incorporation by the SEC (or HIGC for homeowners’ associations).
  • Although Section 46 employs mandatory language (“must”), it is to be construed as directory, not ipso facto fatal to corporate existence.
  • PD 902-A, Section 6(1) expressly provides that failure to file by-laws is a ground for suspension or revocation of the corporate charter—but only after proper notice and hearing.
  • There is no conflict between Section 46 and PD 902-A; they are complementary.

Supreme Court Analysis

  1. “Must” in a statute may be directory where the context, legislative history, and related provisions (e.g., allowance for pre-incorporation filing) demonstrate that non-compliance does not automatically extinguish corporate existence.
  2. Batasang Pambansa debates confirm that failure to file by-laws on time was not intended to produce automatic dissolution.
  3. By-laws are subordinate to the articles of incorporation and the Corporation Code; non-filing is a condition subsequent subject to enforcement, not a prerequisite for existence.
  4. PD 902-A Section 6(1) empowers the SEC (and by delegation the HIGC) to suspend or revoke a charter for fa

...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.