Title
Supreme Court
Salido, Jr. vs. Aramaywan Metals Development Corp.
Case
G.R. No. 233857
Decision Date
Mar 18, 2021
Intra-corporate dispute over share reduction; Supreme Court invalidated reduction due to lack of consideration, violation of corporate law, and non-compliance with procedures.

Case Summary (G.R. No. 233857)

Petitioner

Agapito A. Salido, Jr., representing the Salido faction, contests the Court of Appeals’ Amended Decision invalidating certain board resolutions, including the reduction of San Juan’s shares.

Respondents

Aramaywan Metals Development Corporation; Cerlito G. San Juan; Corazon San Juan; Cristina Marie San Juan (collectively, the San Juan faction).

Key Dates

• Agreement to Incorporate concluded April 2005
• Incorporation of Aramaywan approved September 9, 2005
• First board meeting November 25–26, 2005
• Special board meeting February 5, 2006
• RTC Decision February 14, 2012
• CA Decision January 19, 2016; Amended Decision January 31, 2017
• Supreme Court decision March 18, 2021

Applicable Law

The 1987 Philippine Constitution; Batas Pambansa Blg. 68 (Corporation Code); Civil Code provisions on contract and trust; pertinent SEC regulations.

Factual Background

Under the April 2005 Agreement, San Juan advanced ₱2,500,000 as paid-up subscription for 25,000 shares (55% interest) in Aramaywan and was to assure payment for Narra Mining Corporation shares (35% interest). San Juan deposited the funds in trust at Standard Chartered Bank. Upon incorporation, his 55% stake was split among himself, his wife (Corazon), and daughter (Cristina Marie). The Salido faction claimed San Juan furnished only ₱932,209.16 and proposed reducing his Aramaywan shares to 15% for non‐performance, leading to contested board resolutions in early 2006.

Proceedings Below – RTC Decision

The RTC, relying on minutes of the November 2005 meeting, validated the reduction of San Juan’s shares from 55% to 15%, deemed the excess converted into treasury shares in exchange for his unfulfilled obligations, and upheld related resolutions (except one authorizing corporate negotiations). It declared meetings called by the Salido faction valid and those by the San Juan faction void.

Proceedings Below – CA Decisions

The CA initially affirmed the RTC (January 19, 2016), then in its Amended Decision (January 31, 2017) reversed most RTC findings:
• Held San Juan did not consent to share reduction
• Recognized full ₱2,500,000 advance, entitling him to 55% interest
• Found no valid conversion into treasury shares for lack of unrestricted retained earnings and no return of investment
• Upheld only resolutions appointing the corporate secretary, canceling Narra Mining registration, and treasurer appointment; invalidated change of principal office address

Issue on Appeal

Whether the CA erred in invalidating the reduction of San Juan’s shares and related board resolutions.

Court’s Analysis – Procedural Bars

Under Rule 45, only questions of law are cognizable on Petition for Review. Salido failed to annex critical meeting minutes and neglected to file a Reply, justifying outright dismissal. Nonetheless, the Court proceeded to address substantive merit.

Court’s Analysis – Treasury Share Requirements

B.P. 68 and the Revised Corporation Code require (1) lawful reacquisition; (2) unrestricted retained earnings; and (3) return of full investment or compliance with delinquency sale procedures. Aramaywan, newly formed and without evidence of surplus or paid creditors, lacked funds to repurchase shares. San Juan’s full payment in trust precluded a unilateral reduction without corresponding return, in line with the trust fund doctrine safeguarding capital for creditors.

Court’s Analysis – Lack of Consideration

Even assuming San J

...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.