Title
Supreme Court
Mindanao Savings and Loan Association, Inc. vs. Willkom
Case
G.R. No. 178618
Decision Date
Oct 11, 2010
Unregistered merger between FISLAI and DSLAI deemed invalid; FISLAI’s assets remained liable for debts. Execution sale upheld, Willkom recognized as innocent purchaser.

Case Summary (G.R. No. 178618)

Key Dates

  • 1985: Merger agreement between FISLAI and DSLAI (articles unregistered).
  • April 3, 1987: SEC approves name change from DSLAI to MSLAI.
  • August 31, 1990: Monetary Board orders MSLAI closure and receivership.
  • May 24, 1991: Monetary Board orders MSLAI liquidation, PDIC as liquidator.
  • October 19, 1989: RTC-Iligan Branch 3 grants summary decision for Uy against FISLAI.
  • February 21, 1992: Uy’s judgment becomes final and executory.
  • May 17, 1993: Public auction of six parcels; Willkom high bidder.
  • June 14, 1995: MSLAI/PDIC files complaint for annulment of sale.
  • March 21, 2007 & June 1, 2007: CA decision and resolution denying MSLAI’s claim.
  • October 11, 2010: Supreme Court decision affirming CA.

Applicable Law

  • 1987 Philippine Constitution (banking and PDIC authority)
  • Corporation Code (Batas Pambansa Blg. 68), Sections 76–79 (merger procedures)
  • Civil Code, Article 1625 (publicity of assignment)
  • Civil Code, Articles 1293, 1236–1237 (novation and subrogation)

Procedural History

  1. Uy obtains a money‐judgment against FISLAI (RTC summary decision, final in 1992).
  2. Sheriff Bantuas levies and auctions FISLAI lands; Willkom becomes purchaser; titles registered in his name; Go acquires one parcel.
  3. MSLAI/PDIC sues for annulment of sale, cancellation of titles, reconveyance (RTC Branch 41, Cagayan de Oro City).
  4. RTC dismisses for lack of jurisdiction.
  5. CA affirms dismissal on the ground that no valid merger merged FISLAI into MSLAI and, alternatively, that Willkom is an innocent purchaser; MSLAI lacks standing.
  6. Supreme Court grants certiorari under Rule 45 to resolve validity of merger and novation.

Issues Presented

  1. Whether the merger between FISLAI and DSLAI (now MSLAI) was valid and effective.
  2. Whether MSLAI’s alleged assumption of FISLAI’s liabilities constituted novation, thereby insulating FISLAI’s assets from execution.

Validity of Merger

  • Corporation Code requires (a) board approval and plan of merger; (b) stockholder approval by two-thirds vote; (c) execution of articles of merger; and (d) SEC approval by issuance of a certificate of merger.
  • FISLAI–DSLAI articles of merger were not filed or approved by the SEC; no certificate of merger issued.
  • Effectivity of merger occurs only upon SEC certification. In its absence, FISLAI and DSLAI (MSLAI) remain separate juridical entities.
  • Third parties are entitled to rely on corporate personalities as reflected in the public records; unregistered merger and unregistered assignment of assets cannot prejudice them (Civil Code, Art. 1625).
  • Conclusion: The purported merger was legally ineffective; FISLAI remained a distinct corporation and its properties were subject to execution.

Novation Analysis

  • Novation by change of debtor requires (a) new obligation; (b) substitution of debtor; and (c) creditor’s express consent (Civil Code, Art. 1293).
  • While DSLAI/MSLAI may have assumed FISLAI’s l

...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.